LSAT 150 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q8

LR Question 8 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: One should not confuse a desire for money with a desire…

QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument

CONCLUSION: You shouldn’t mix up the desire for money and for material possessions.

REASONING: A lot of what money can buy isn’t material. And material goods are often wanted for experiences.

ANALYSIS: On any role in argument question, you should start by identifying the conclusion. There are two clear indicators here:

• “Should”. Generally, a sentence with should in it is the conclusion.
• “Moreover”. I’ll explain this one below, but briefly it means a previous sentence was the conclusion.

Moreover is used as the second sentence of evidence. Here’s an example:

1. The sun is good. [Conclusion]
2. It warms us. [Reasoning]
3. Moreover, it gives plants energy. [Reasoning]

See how it works? “Moreover” says: “This is reasoning, the sentence before was reasoning, and the conclusion was the sentence before that one”. It means “This is an additional reason, after the first one.”

___________

1. This is a different structure.
    
   Example of structure: Humans are smart. For example, we can see that this prisoner escaped their jail cell. Since humans are smart, they must have used human smartness to escape.
2. CORRECT. See the analysis above. The use of the word “should” indicates the first sentence is the conclusion. “Moreover” indicates the final two sentences are evidence.
3. There’s no other conclusion. Both the second and the third sentence support the first sentence. The word “moreover” indicates that this is the case.
4. There were no counterexamples. A counterexample would be an example that disagrees with the first sentence.
    
   Example of counterexamples: John confused his desire for money money with his desire for material possessions. Normally, this would be a bad thing, but in this case, the confusion saved John’s marriage! So, his case is a counterexample to my general principle.
5. Rubbish. The first sentence is the conclusion. And there was no other sentence which “solved” the statement in the first sentence.

Recap: The question begins with “One should not confuse a desire for money with a desire”. It is a Role in Argument question. Learn more about LSAT Role questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.