PrepTest 109, Section 3, Question 21
Some government economists view their home countries as(51 more words not shown)
The argument's conclusion follows logically(8 more words not shown)
- AA national economy(16 more words not shown)
- BEconomics is weakly(5 more words not shown)
- CEconomic theories relying(15 more words not shown)
- DInternational trade is(8 more words not shown)
- ESome government economists(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
International trade affects an economy. Does the economy need its government economists to understand that fact in order to prosper?
That's the connection I want the author to explain. We are told that economies are open systems and that trade significantly affects prices and wages. Let's accept those facts. They give economists a reason to pay attention to the outside world, but the conclusion says that paying attention is required for prosperity.
What if the economists misunderstand trade but still recommend good policies? Perhaps their ideas about taxes and other domestic matters work well enough that the economy prospers anyway. Their picture of the world would be incomplete, but an incomplete understanding doesn't automatically rule out a good result.
What we’re looking for
The physics comparison urges economists to replace an idealized picture with attention to reality. That may be sensible advice. It still doesn't supply the missing requirement about prosperity. For the question asking us to make the conclusion follow, we need a rule that makes examining outside influences necessary for the economy to prosper.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
A prosperous national economy requires its government economists to have examined every significant influence on it. International trade is one of those influences: the passage expressly says it significantly affects prices and wages.
Put the rule and the fact together. If the economy is to prosper, the economists must examine international trade. That means looking beyond national borders, which is exactly the conclusion we need. The rule doesn't merely say that doing so is useful; it makes the examination a requirement.
- B
A weak resemblance between economics and physics doesn't establish what an economy needs in order to prosper. We could grant the analogy and still ask whether economists who misunderstand outside influences might recommend successful policies. B leaves the important connection unproved.
- C
A less accurate theory could still lead to policies under which an economy prospers. C compares the accuracy of two kinds of theory; the conclusion concerns a requirement for a successful economy. We still need a rule connecting the economists' examination of significant influences with prosperity.
- D
Even if trade were the biggest influence on prices and wages, that wouldn't establish that government economists must examine it for the nation to prosper. The effects could occur regardless of what those economists believe. Making trade more important doesn't fill the gap about what the economists must do.
- E
Some economists might indeed be ignoring trade. But does that prevent prosperity? That is the missing part. Describing the neglect doesn't establish its consequences. Their other policy ideas might still work well, so E doesn't rule out the possibility that motivated our objection.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.