PT66.S4.Q23 - alex: shrimp farming results in damage to the environment

brna0714

http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-66-section-4-question-23/
I just wanted to hear other people's thoughts on this question. It just felt totally weird to me, it seemed like the correct answer choice was inconsequential compared to the central disagreement, which I *incorrectly* assumed was damaging to the environment vs. not damaging.

Jolene appears to be taking issue with Alex's premise rather than the conclusion or the argument itself. Thoughts?

inactive

Bumping this so you can get help!

brna0714

Thanks for your help, @"Dillon A. Wright" !

dubnation

You're right... Jolene doesn't take issue with whether or not it's damaging to the environment. She has no opinion. If you read her argument carefully, you'll notice that when she says she disagrees, everything that follows suggests that she disagrees as to whether quick profits are made.

brna0714

@ryanjchan

Absolutely. Thanks for your response. In retrospect, it's not that difficult to see but under time constraints I read the first part of the stimulus and then made all types of assumptions about what the central disagreement would be and that caused me to gloss over the second part of the stimulus and the correct answer choice.

I guess it would be beneficial for me to note that agree/disagree questions don't necessarily have to be about the central issue at all. It could be about some small detail as long as it is agreed upon (or there is a disagreement, depending on the stem).

If I had slowed down enough to actually consider each answer choice carefully rather than eliminating quickly because it didn't match what I anticipated, I would have had a better shot at reaching the correct answer on this one.