LSAT 134 – Section 1 – Question 25

LSAT 134 - Section 1 - Question 25

October 2011

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:19

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
PT134 S1 Q25
+LR
Argument part +AP
Net Effect +NetEff
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
7%
160
B
68%
166
C
6%
159
D
16%
162
E
2%
156
147
157
168
 +Harder 147.067 +SubsectionMedium

Editorial: The town would not need to spend as much as it does on removing trash if all town residents sorted their household garbage. However, while telling residents that they must sort their garbage would get some of them to do so, many would resent the order and refuse to comply. The current voluntary system, then, is to be preferred, because it costs about as much as a nonvoluntary system would and it does not engender nearly as much resentment.

Summarize Argument
The editorialist concludes that the voluntary garbage-sorting system should be retained. This is because the alternative, a mandatory garbage-sorting system, would foster resentment. In turn, many people would refuse to sort their garbage at all.

Identify Argument Part
The referenced text is a concession the editorialist makes about an alternative to the practice she recommends. It’s true that the town would spend less under a mandatory sorting system, but the editorialist suggests there are other things to consider.

A
It is a claim that the editorial is trying to show is false.
The editorialist concedes that the town wouldn’t have to spend as much under a mandatory system. He simply believes there are reasons to retain the current system.
B
It is a fact granted by the editorial that lends some support to an alternative to the practice that the editorial defends as preferable.
The editorialist agrees that the town wouldn’t have to spend as much under a mandatory system, which certainly supports installing such a system. Still, the editorialist defends the current system as a better option.
C
It is an example of a difficulty facing the claim that the editorial is attempting to refute.
The editorialist isn’t refuting a claim. Instead, he’s recommending one of two options.
D
It is a premise that the editorial’s argument relies on in reaching its conclusion.
The fact that a mandatory system would be less expensive doesn’t support the editorialist’s argument. It’s a fact he concedes about one option while arguing for the other.
E
It is the conclusion that the editorial’s argument purports to establish.
The editorialist doesn’t try to support the claim that a mandatory system would cost less. He argues instead for retaining a voluntary system.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 134 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply