PT131.S2.Q18

PrepTest 131 - Section 2 - Question 18

Hide analysis

Contrary to Malthus's arguments, human food-producing capacity has increased more rapidly than human population. ████ ████████████ ████████ █████ ██████████ ██████████ ██████████ ██████████ █████████ ██████████ ████ ████████████ ████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ ████ ███████████ ███ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ███████ █ ████ ██ ████████████ ████ ██████████ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ███████ █████

Argument Summary: Cause-and-Effect Chain

The author starts with a concession: "contrary to Malthus's arguments," humans' capacity for producing food has increased more rapidly than human population. So Malthus argued that human population would exceed humans' capacity to produce food, and was incorrect about that.

But the author then points out that developments in agriculture often threaten biodiversity. Because a lack of biodiversity will eventually undermine our ability to produce food, the author concludes that Malthus's prediction that insufficient food will drive humanity to war, pestilence, and famine will be proven correct in the future.

Show answer
18.

The statement that human food-producing ████████ ███ █████████ ████ ███████ ████ █████ ██████████ █████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████ ██ ███ █████████

a

It is a ██████████ ███ ████████ ████████ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ██ █████████ ██████
Incorrect. The author provides this statement as a fact, not as something to be proven wrong.
5%
b

It is a ████ ██ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███████ ███ ██████████ ████ █ ██████████ ████ ██ ██████████
Incorrect. The author's conclusion is not that Malthus's view is entirely misguided. In fact, the author argues that Malthus's prediction, if not his argument supporting that prediction, will be proven right. So (B) incorrectly describes the argument.
8%
c

It is an ███████████ ████ ███ ████████ ████████ ████████ ████████ █████████ █████████
Incorrect. The author clearly states that this fact is contrary to Malthus's argument. If you picked (C), maybe you thought that this fact ultimately does support Malthus's position, because (as the author argues), the agricultural advances that presumably allowed food-producing capacity to increase will eventually undermine biodiversity and therefore cause food-producing capacity to decline again, thus leading to insufficient food.

But this prediction about the future doesn't change the fact that right now, human food-producing capacity has outpaced human population, which (as the author says) is contrary to Malthus's argument. The author never claims that Malthus's entire argument or "position" is ultimately right, just that Malthus's final prediction (not the argument supporting it) will be proven right, for other reasons than Malthus predicted.

47%
d

It is a ███████ ████ ████ ███ ████████ ██████ ██████ ██ ███████ ████ ██████████ ███████
Correct. The author presents this statement as a fact: human food-producing capacity has increased faster than human population. But the author then goes on to argue that eventually, humans will no longer be able to produce enough food for their population. So this fact will eventually change.
39%
e

It is a ██████████ █████ █████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ██████████ █████████
Incorrect. Again, the author presents this statement as a fact, not as a hypothesis to be undermined.
2%

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

It takes about five minutes.

Take the free diagnostic
More free LSAT prep: Sample LSAT questions Full-length diagnostic & practice test All free LSAT resources

Confirm action

Are you sure?