LSAT 114 – Section 4 – Question 03

LSAT 114 - Section 4 - Question 03

October 2002

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

Target time: 1:01

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
PT114 S4 Q03
+LR
Main conclusion or main point +MC
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
A
3%
154
B
3%
154
C
1%
153
D
1%
150
E
93%
162
125
135
145
 +Easier 144.851 +SubsectionEasier

Journalist: Obviously, though some animals are purely carnivorous, none would survive without plants. But the dependence is mutual. Many plant species would never have come to be had there been no animals to pollinate, fertilize, and broadcast their seeds. Also, plants’ photosynthetic activity would deplete the carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere were it not constantly being replenished by the exhalation of animals, engine fumes, and smoke from fires, many set by human beings.

Summarize Argument
Plants depend on animals for their survival; it’s not just animals that depend on plants. This is because animals play an essential role in ensuring the survival and spread of plant species by pollinating, fertilizing, and broadcasting seeds. Further, animals make sure there is continually enough carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for plants to undergo photosynthesis. This is achieved not only when animals exhale, but also when humans emit carbon dioxide through fires and fumes from machines.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is that plants also depend on animals for their survival: “The dependence is mutual.”

A
The photosynthetic activity of plants is necessary for animal life, but animal life is also necessary for the occurrence of photosynthesis in plants.
The role of photosynthesis is cited as a premise for the conclusion that animals and plants both depend on each other. Photosynthesis is just an example that demonstrates the mutual dependence; the conclusion is not about photosynthesis.
B
Some purely carnivorous animals would not survive without plants.
Our conclusion is about the mutual dependence between plants (in general) and animals (in general), not the dependence of a subset of animals (in this answer, the subset is “purely carnivorous animals”) on plants.
C
The chemical composition of Earth and its atmosphere depends, at least to some extent, on the existence and activities of the animals that populate Earth.
The conclusion of the argument does not involve the chemical composition of Earth and its atmosphere. One specific aspect of the chemical composition (the balance of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere) is referenced as a premise.
D
Human activity is part of what prevents plants from depleting the oxygen in Earth’s atmosphere on which plants and animals alike depend.
This is part of a premise. This answer provides support for the conclusion that plants also depend on animals.
E
Just as animals are dependent on plants for their survival, plants are dependent on animals for theirs.
This is the conclusion that the rest of the argument sets out to support. The journalist is trying to convince the reader of the mutual dependence between plants and animals; every other part of the argument supports this idea.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 114 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply