PT72.S2.Q07 - expert: some people claim that

zkchrumzzkchrumz Free Trial Member
edited January 2017 in Logical Reasoning 164 karma

I am retaking some of the 70's PT's to get ready for Saturday (fingers crossed!). Most of the LR is no problem for me, I just was hoping for a bit of a discussion on a few questions, maybe someone can critique my reasoning? So here it is:

This is an extremely tricky strengthen question for me.The stimulus doesn't ACTUALLY mention that population growth will continue, which is the flaw I suppose. IF the trend doesn't continue, then there is no need to address concerns. Beyond that, the argument DOES indeed note that the planets resources allow for "food to be produced" at several times what it is now, and that there is a maximum to it. Answer choice B (the one I picked way back when) doesn't mention food shortages, so that is a count against it, but I am caught on the terms here "food resources from ... the ocean ... will eventually be fully utilized". To me that could be a counter to the objection, "maybe food has a maximum PRODUCTION amount, but we fish from the oceans, which doesn't count as PRODUCING, its more like procuring." I read produce here to mean "to compose, create, or bring out by intellectual or physical effort" [Merriam-Webster def. 6]. I suppose LSAC here means "to give birth or rise to : yield" [Merriam-Webster def 2]. Anyone find this a bit frustrating? Thoughts on how to avoid confusion when they try to play tricks on language?
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-07/

Comments

  • tjphilbricktjphilbrick Alum Member
    174 karma

    I certainly didn't get into the language as much as you did, but I eliminated B because it is only talking about the oceans. There are plenty of other food sources in the world that could very well last much longer, so this AC does not necessarily strengthen the argument.

Sign In or Register to comment.