LR Question 6 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Forestry official: Many people think that if forest fires…
QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument
CONCLUSION: Forestry officials should let small fires burn.
REASONING: These small fires clear the forest of small trees and debris. This reduces the odds of larger fires later. (because larger fires can use small trees and debris to burn faster)
ANALYSIS: The question asks about the role of the information that says small fires clear out small trees and forest debris.
Small trees and debris can cause large fires later on. Small fires are the solution: they help clear debris. So, this is evidence that allowing small fires is good.
Note also that the forestry official is arguing against an opposing viewpoint. They mention “many people” who hold an opposing view in the first sentence.
___________
- The forestry official is arguing that this view is wrong! They said the Forestry Department should not try to put out small fires as quickly as possible.
- CORRECT. The line in question is evidence against the opposing viewpoint. Allowing small fires clears out small trees and debris.
“Evidence” is quite general. Any fact can be evidence, and the forestry official indeed uses this fact to show their opponents are wrong. - This one is tricky to untangle. Let’s start with the end: the ideas most people have are that the forest service should stop all fires immediately, even small ones. So, if the department based its policies on these ideas, it would stop all fires immediately. The consequence of that would be: no clearing of small trees and debris.
So this answer is talking about the opposite of the phrase in question. Allowing small fires to burn clears debris. But, per this answer, instead following the policies people want will prevent small fires from clearing debris. - There was no example.
Example of an example: A local man, John Smith, today complained on WSBC news that he heard about a small bush fire and thought the Forestry Department was negligent in not extinguishing it. “That fire could burn us all down” yelled Smith angrily, while shaking his fist in the air. - Actually the idea that it is best to let small fires burn is the conclusion. Moral words like “best” tend to be conclusions in LR questions.
Recap: The question begins with “Forestry official: Many people think that if forest fires”. It is a Role in Argument question. Learn more about LSAT Role questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.
More Resources for Role in Argument Questions
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Role in Argument questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers role in argument questions.
I think that the reason C is incorrect is due to the word “most.” The stimulus states that “many” people feel a certain way about the job of the Forestry Department, not “most.” Thus, C must be incorrect because it cannot be confirmed that “most” people possess the same sentiments.
That’s a good catch. You’re right that the distinction between many and most is big on the LSAT, so that’s another reason why C is wrong.
But the bigger problem here is the one that Graeme wrote in the explanation. C mischaracterizes the role of the statement. The claim about small fires clearing debris is offered as positive support for letting small fires burn. C, by contrast, frames it as showing the negative consequence of following public opinion. I emphasize that because, even if C had said many instead of most, it would still be wrong because it assigns the statement the wrong argumentative function.
But you’re correct that there’s multiple issues with C. Thanks for pointing that out!