LSAT 109 – Section 1 – Question 05

LSAT 109 - Section 1 - Question 05

December 2000

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:11

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT109 S1 Q05
+LR
Main conclusion or main point +MC
Math +Math
A
2%
157
B
0%
143
C
1%
161
D
5%
160
E
92%
167
131
141
151
 +Easier 148.877 +SubsectionMedium

A recent national study of the trash discarded in several representative areas confirmed that plastics constitute a smaller proportion of all trash than paper products do, whether the trash is measured by weight or by volume. The damage that a given weight or volume of trash does to the environment is roughly the same whether the trash consists of plastics or paper products. Contrary to popular opinion, therefore, the current use of plastics actually does less harm to the environment nationwide than that of paper products.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author argues that plastic use in a certain nation is actually less harmful to the environment than the use of paper products. This is supported by the claim that a given amount of trash does about the same amount of harm, whether plastic or paper. Additionally, a recent study found that the nation produces more paper trash than plastic trash.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion that the argument supports is the author’s statement that “the current use of plastics actually does less harm to the environment nationwide than that of paper products.”

A
plastics constitute a smaller proportion of the nation’s total trash than do paper products
This statement is used in the argument to support the claim that paper trash is currently more harmful than plastic trash, and is not supported by anything else. That makes this a premise.
B
the ratio of weight to volume is the same for plastic trash as it is for paper trash
The author never discusses the ratio of weight to volume for any kind of trash. All we know is that plastic trash has a smaller weight and volume than paper trash, not the ratios.
C
popular opinion regards the use of paper products as less harmful to the environment than the use of products made from plastic
The author’s mention of popular opinion just adds context and flavor to the argument. Nothing in the argument is meant to support a claim about popular opinion, so this can’t be the main conclusion.
D
contrary to popular opinion, a shift away from the use of paper products to the use of plastics would benefit the environment nationwide
The author never makes any claims about how potential changes in product use would impact the environment. The argument is purely about what’s going on right now.
E
at this time more harm is being done to the environment nationwide by the use of paper than by the use of plastics
This accurately restates the conclusion. The rest of the argument supports the author’s statement that plastic trash is currently less harmful than paper trash; or in other words, that paper trash is more harmful right now.

</section

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 109 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply