PrepTest 115, Section 2, Question 23
Councilperson X: We have an obligation to help(105 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AThe council should(8 more words not shown)
- BIt is the(9 more words not shown)
- CA plant of(16 more words not shown)
- DIf a new(21 more words not shown)
- EA plant of(15 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The cheapest electricity isn't necessarily the best deal. What if getting that price damages the community? I'd want to compare the savings with the cost of that damage before endorsing the plant.
Imagine a slightly more expensive design that keeps the water clean. Would saving another ten dollars really justify a polluted river? That's a hypothetical concern about X's reasoning, not a fact about this proposal. Y supplies the actual concern: the proposed plant would harm air quality so much that the damage would outweigh the savings. X treats the price as decisive; Y accepts that lower rates are a benefit but says the council has another obligation that the proposal would violate.
What we’re looking for
Keep X's condition attached. X doesn't simply say we should build a new plant. X says that if we agree a new plant must be built, this is the design to endorse. For the disagreement question, I want that conditional choice of design: if we're building a plant, should we choose this one? X says yes; Y's air-quality objection says no.
Working the answers
- A
X hasn't settled whether to build a new generating station. X says which design to select if construction has to go ahead. Y likewise objects to this design rather than ruling out every new plant. A asks about building a plant at all, so it misses the decision the speakers dispute.
- B
X doesn't take a position on a general responsibility to improve quality of life. Y says the council must not lower it, which isn't quite the same as an obligation to improve it. We don't have opposing answers to B's claim.
- C
Y says the design would damage air quality. X says nothing about that effect. X could know about the pollution and still consider cheap electricity decisive. A speaker's failure to mention a harm doesn't establish that the speaker denies it.
- DCorrect
This keeps X's condition and the disputed design together. If a station is to be built, X says the council should endorse this type because it permits the lowest rates. Y says the air-quality damage outweighs that benefit, giving a reason not to endorse this type even when a new station is needed.
- E
Y doesn't dispute the claim about the lowest rates. Y's argument is that the benefit of those lower rates would be outweighed by harm to the air. The two speakers can agree on the price advantage and still disagree about whether it makes the design worth choosing.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.