LSAT 123 – Section 2 – Question 01

LSAT 123 - Section 2 - Question 01

June 2007

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

Target time: 1:27

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
PT123 S2 Q01	+LR	Main conclusion or main point +MC Causal Reasoning +CausR Net Effect +NetEff	A 9% 146 B 83% 152 C 0% 143 D 2% 144 E 6% 144	120 129 143	+Easiest	143.659 +SubsectionEasier

Economist: Every business strives to increase its productivity, for this increases profits for the owners and the likelihood that the business will survive. But not all efforts to increase productivity are beneficial to the business as a whole. Often, attempts to increase productivity decrease the number of employees, which clearly harms the dismissed employees as well as the sense of security of the retained employees.

Summarize Argument: Causal Explanation

The economist concludes that some attempts to increase productivity are not beneficial to the business as a whole. As support for this, the economist says that attempts to increase productivity often result in a decrease in the number of employees. This is harmful both for the employees who lose their jobs, and also for the employees who stick around, because they lose their sense of security in their jobs.

Identify Conclusion

The conclusion is that efforts to increase productivity are not always beneficial for the overall company: “Not all efforts to increase productivity are beneficial to the business as a whole.”

If an action taken to secure the survival of a business fails to enhance the welfare of the business’s employees, that action cannot be good for the business as a whole.

The argument simply concludes that not all efforts to increase productivity have an overall beneficial effect; this conditional relationship in answer choice A is not the main conclusion.

Some measures taken by a business to increase productivity fail to be beneficial to the business as a whole.

This is the main conclusion. This is an excellent paraphrase of the sentence identified as the conclusion in the argument. The sentence following this idea in the argument is a premise that provides support for this idea.

Only if the employees of a business are also its owners will the interests of the employees and owners coincide, enabling measures that will be beneficial to the business as a whole.

This answer says that the employees also being the owners of a business is a necessary condition for aligning the interests of owners and employees; this conditional relationship is not mentioned or supported in the argument, so this is not the main conclusion.

There is no business that does not make efforts to increase its productivity.

This is information given as context for the argument: business→ efforts to increase productivity
/efforts to increase productivity→/business

Decreasing the number of employees in a business undermines the sense of security of retained employees.

This information is offered as support for the main conclusion, so this is a premise of the argument.

LSAT 123 – Section 2 – Question 01

LSAT 123 - Section 2 - Question 01

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 123 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel