LR Drill Set 2, Question 9
The use of crops that have been genetically(59 more words not shown)
The claim that the problem(30 more words not shown)
- AIt presents the(8 more words not shown)
- BIt supports the(12 more words not shown)
- CIt is the(5 more words not shown)
- DIt is a(11 more words not shown)
- EIt is an(6 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If there's already enough food, growing more may miss the problem.
That's the author's response to crops engineered for higher yields and resistance to pests, drought, and disease. I can see why those features sound helpful: more crops survive, and farms produce more. But food has to reach the people who need it. Producing extra food in one place doesn't automatically get it to someone somewhere else.
The author supports this diagnosis by pointing to record food production per person. That fact is meant to make us accept the middle claim that shortages are more a distribution problem than a supply problem. The middle claim then gives us a reason to doubt that increasing yields will resolve the shortages.
Could improved crops also help distribution somehow? Perhaps, but the role question doesn't require us to prove the author's argument sound. It asks how the selected claim functions within it.
What we’re looking for
Trace the support in order: record production supports the distribution diagnosis; the distribution diagnosis supports the conclusion about genetically altered crops. The selected claim is the middle link.
Working the answers
- A
The author accepts the claim that distribution is the bigger problem and uses it to support the argument. It is not an opponent's view being challenged. The crops' limited likely benefit is inferred from that diagnosis.
- BCorrect
The distribution claim both receives support and gives support. The fact that production per person is at a record high supports it; it in turn supports the conclusion that higher-yield crops are unlikely to reduce widespread shortages. Those two jobs make it an intermediate conclusion.
- C
The main conclusion is the opening claim about genetically altered crops being unlikely to reduce food shortages. The distribution statement explains why the author thinks that. It isn't the final point the reasoning is trying to establish.
- D
We don't have two conclusions drawn from the selected claim. The record-production statement is offered in support of it, not as a result inferred from it. The reasoning moves through a chain rather than branching from this statement into two separate conclusions.
- E
The selected claim does more than restate or expand the description of the final conclusion. It gives a reason for it: if the obstacle is getting existing food to people, increasing the quantity produced may not solve that obstacle. B captures this supporting role and the additional fact that the claim itself receives support.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.