LSAT 91 - Section 2 - Question 12

This is an AP question.

We’re asked to describe the role played by the statement that “people generally notice and are concerned about only the most obvious public health problems.”

That appears as the first sentence in the stimulus. It’s a rule or principle about psychology at a group level. How can we apply this rule or principle to a particular situation? If we can identify the most obvious public health problem, then we can infer that people will notice and be concerned with only that problem (and hence no other problems). The next claim starts with “although,” which signals a concession point. Although ozone (air pollutant) can be dangerous and hence a public health problem, most people are currently well aware that contaminated water presents a much more widespread threat to our community. So contaminated water is the most obvious public health problem. It looks like we have enough information to apply the principle. Contaminated water will obscure the air pollution problem. And that’s exactly what the conclusion says. There’s unlikely to be a widespread effort for new more restrictive air pollution controls.

So, what’s the role that the principle or rule played? It’s to support the argument’s conclusion. It’s a premise.

Answer Choice (A) says it’s a premise offered in support of another premise. That’s wrong. The claim that contaminated water presents a more widespread threat is given no support. If you are skeptical of the claim, the argument doesn’t care to change your mind. Notice the absence of any evidence that water contamination is even a problem at all. We just have to take the argument’s word for it.

Correct Answer Choice (B) identifies the conclusion that there’s unlikely to be a widespread effort for new more restrictive air pollution controls.

Answer Choice (C) says it’s used to explain the current public awareness of the severity of the problem of contaminated water. No, it’s not. It’s used to predict a consequence of the current public awareness of the severity of the problem of contaminated water, namely that nobody will care about air pollution. If we wanted an explanation of the current public awareness of the severity of the problem of contaminated water, we’d have to start conjecturing. Perhaps a local news story publicized the water contamination problem. Perhaps the mayor shone a spotlight on this issue. Perhaps perhaps perhaps. We have no information about why the current public awareness is what it is.

Answer Choice (D) says it’s “indisputable evidence” (premise) that ozone can be dangerous. No. That’s nuts. Ozone is the air pollutant. This is a general rule of social psychology.

Answer Choice (E) says it’s the main conclusion. No, it’s not.