LSAT 153 | Section 4 | Reading Comprehension: Q6

RC Question 6 Explanation

DISCUSSION: The author thinks, broadly, that critics:

1. Are not well informed, and that
2. Critics overvalue the benefits of forests

So, you can eliminate any answers that contradict those ideas. Oddly enough that eliminates all four wrong answers. #2 eliminates B, and #1 eliminates the other three answers.

Note: it’s easier to get through these answers if you realize that the author made no distinction between environmentalists. Technically, the critics of commercial plantations are only mentioned in paragraph 4. But since the author made no distinction, we have no basis for believing these critics are different than any of the other environmentalists the author mentioned.

___________

1. CORRECT. Lines 49-50 in paragraph 3 support this answer. The author says that commercial plantations help protect forests: commercial plantations reduce logging pressure on natural forests.
    
   So, if the environmentalists considered this relationship more carefully, they might realize that while they’re opposed to logging of old growth forests, commercial plantations help reduce this logging.
2. This is very unlikely. Almost anyone arguing for the preservation of rainforests has made the medical potential argument, so we could expect these critics to believe it. In any case, the author has made no argument that they don’t.
    
   (This falls under point #2 above: critics overvalue forests, so we can discard any answer that says critics don’t value forests enough.)
3. This answer contradicts paragraph 2. There, the author argues that environmentalists are wrong about how forests generate oxygen. It’s reasonable to assume the critics of commercial plantations are similarly misinformed: the author makes no distinctions between environmentalists.
4. This answer contradicts lines 49-50 in paragraph 4: the author says that commercial plantations reduce pressure on natural forests. So if we banned commercial plantations, then loggers would likely cut down more natural forests. It doesn’t sound as though critics of commercial plantations have considered that.
5. This is unlikely. The author’s entire argument is that environmentalists have misunderstood the issues they’re concerned about.