LSAT 146 – Section 3 – Question 04

LSAT 146 - Section 3 - Question 04

June 2016

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:04

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
PT146 S3 Q04
+LR
Argument part +AP
Rule-Application +RuleApp
A
1%
159
B
2%
154
C
89%
165
D
8%
158
E
1%
151
130
141
152
 +Easier 146.758 +SubsectionMedium

According to economists, people’s tendency to purchase a given commodity is inversely proportional to its price. When new techniques produced cheaper steel, more steel was purchased. Nevertheless, once machine-produced lace became available, at much lower prices than the handcrafted variety, lace no longer served to advertise its wearers’ wealth and the lace market collapsed. Obviously, then, there are exceptions to the economists’ general rule.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that there are exceptions to the general rule of economists that people’s tendency to purchase a commodity is inversely proportional to its price. As support for the conclusion, the author provides an example of a commodity that breaks this rule: lace. As lace became less expensive, the lace market collapsed because lace no longer functioned as a wealth signifier.

Identify Argument Part
The claim in the question stem is an example of a commodity that follows the general rule of economists that people’s tendency to purchase a commodity is inversely proportional to its price.

A
It is described as inadequate evidence for the falsity of the argument’s conclusion.
The claim in the question stem is not used to claim that the author’s conclusion is false; the claim in the question stem is just used as an example to illustrate the economists’ rule.
B
It is described as an exception to a generalization for which the argument offers evidence.
The claim about steel is used as an example of a commodity that follows the economists’ rule, not an exception to the generalization. Further, the argument does not offer evidence of a generalization; the argument offers evidence of an exception to a generalization.
C
It is used to illustrate the generalization that, according to the argument, does not hold in all cases.
The claim about steel is used as an example to demonstrate the economists’ general rule. Additionally, the argument does say that this general rule does not hold in all cases.
D
It is the evidence that, according to the argument, led economists to embrace a false hypothesis.
The argument does not claim that the example of steel led economists to embrace anything; it is just an example that follows the economists’ rule. Further, the author does not argue that the hypothesis is false, just that it has exceptions.
E
It is cited as one of several reasons for modifying a general assumption made by economists.
The author is not advocating modification of the economists’ general rule; the author is only saying that the rule has exceptions. Further, the example about steel conforms to the general rule.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 146 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply