LSAT 138 – Section 2 – Question 26

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:46

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
PT138 S2 Q26
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Net Effect +NetEff
A
4%
161
B
3%
156
C
3%
158
D
88%
165
E
1%
155
135
145
155
+Medium 147.395 +SubsectionMedium

Sarah: When commercial fishing boats with permits to fish for certain species accidentally catch a type of fish for which they have no permit, the latter must be thrown back. This is a very wasteful practice because many, if not most, of the rejected fish do not survive. Fishing permits should therefore be altered so that fishers can keep fish caught accidentally.

Amar: Making it legal to keep those fish would probably lead to a lot more “accidents.”

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Amar implicitly concludes that Sarah’s recommendation to allow fishers to keep accidentally caught fish should not be implemented. He argues that making this legal would likely lead to more "accidents," implying that fishers would claim that certain fish were caught accidentally just so that they could keep the fish.

Describe Method of Reasoning
Amar responds to Sarah’s argument by pointing out that her suggestion would likely lead to a negative consequence: fishers claiming fish were caught accidentally in order to keep fish they caught illegally.

A
question whether Sarah’s recommendation can be put into practice
Amar never questions whether Sarah’s recommendation can practically be implemented. He simply argues that her recommendation would likely bring a negative consequence.
B
point out that Sarah used a crucial term in two distinct senses
Amar himself uses the term "accidents" to suggest that fishers would falsely claim they caught certain fish by accident. However, Sarah uses "accident" to mean a true accident, and Amar doesn't argue that she uses the term in two different ways.
C
allude to a factor that supposedly strengthens the case for Sarah’s recommendation
Amar doesn’t strengthen the case for Sarah’s recommendation, he argues against her recommendation.
D
contend that Sarah’s recommendation has an important negative consequence
Amar argues that Sarah’s recommendation has an important negative consequence: fishers claiming fish were caught accidentally in order to keep fish they caught illegally.
E
maintain that Sarah overlooks important lessons from past policies
Amar never mentions anything about past policies, he just argues that Sarah’s recommendation would have a negative consequence.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply