LSAT 113 – Section 2 – Question 23

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

Target time: 1:32

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
PT113 S2 Q23
+LR
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Net Effect +NetEff
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
2%
155
B
51%
161
C
2%
152
D
18%
158
E
26%
158
143
159
176
+Harder 147.106 +SubsectionMedium

Roxanne: To protect declining elephant herds from poachers seeking to obtain ivory, people concerned about such endangered species should buy no new ivory. The new ivory and old ivory markets are entirely independent, however, so purchasing antique ivory provides no incentive to poachers to obtain more new ivory. Therefore, only antique ivory—that which is at least 75 years old—can be bought in good conscience.

Salvador: Since current demand for antique ivory exceeds the supply, many people who are unconcerned about endangered species but would prefer to buy antique ivory are buying new ivory instead. People sharing your concern about endangered species, therefore, should refrain from buying any ivory at allthereby ensuring that demand for new ivory will drop.

Speaker 1 Summary
Roxanne argues that people who want to protect elephants from poachers should only buy antique ivory. This is because there are separate markets for new ivory and antique ivory, so buying antique ivory doesn’t increase the demand for new ivory. Thus, although new ivory is harmful, buying antique ivory doesn’t incentivize poaching.

Speaker 2 Summary
Salvador argues that people who want to protect elephants should not buy any ivory at all. Why? There’s more demand for antique ivory than supply, so some people buy new ivory instead because antique ivory is too expensive. By not buying any ivory at all, people can lower the demand for antique ivory, therefore redirecting some new-ivory sales and reducing the demand for poaching.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. Roxanne and Salvador disagree about whether buying antique ivory threatens elephants.

A
there are substances that can serve as satisfactory substitutes for ivory in its current uses
Neither Roxanne nor Salvador mentions any substances that can substitute for ivory. The discussion is about antique versus new ivory, not ivory versus something else.
B
decreased demand for antique ivory would cause a decrease in demand for new ivory
Roxanne claims that the demand for antique ivory is unrelated to the demand for new ivory. Salvador argues that lowering the demand for antique ivory can lower the demand for new ivory by redirecting some buyers. This is the point of disagreement.
C
people should take steps to avert a threat to the continued existence of elephant herds
Roxanne and Salvador both discuss only what people should do if they want to help protect elephants. Neither directly states that people should protect elephants, but it would be fair to assume that they both agree it’s a good idea. Either way, no disagreement here.
D
a widespread refusal to buy new ivory will have a substantial effect on the survival of elephants
Neither speaker talks about how impactful a refusal to buy new ivory would be. Even Roxanne, who proposes a boycott of new ivory as a way to protect elephants, doesn’t specify how much this could do to help the species.
E
people concerned about endangered species should refuse to buy ivory objects that are less than 75 years old
Roxanne agrees with this, and so does Salvador. Roxanne states that people with this concern should not buy ivory less than 75 years old. Salvador goes even further and says that those people should not buy any ivory at all, which includes new ivory.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply