PrepTest 117, Section 4, Question 6
Doctors urge people to reduce their cholesterol levels(31 more words not shown)
The statement that moderate dietary(19 more words not shown)
- AIt is presented(13 more words not shown)
- BIt is a(18 more words not shown)
- CIt is a(18 more words not shown)
- DIt is offered(13 more words not shown)
- EIt is a(22 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If a small dietary change isn't working, maybe a bigger change is needed. That is a sensible possibility to consider. Notice how cautiously the author puts it. Moderate changes “often” fail, so someone “may need” to make more dramatic changes. The claim isn't that everyone must become vegetarian or that every modest change is useless. A vegetarian diet is offered as an example of a substantial change.
What we’re looking for
The question asks what role the statement about moderate changes plays. Start with the conclusion: reducing cholesterol may require a bigger dietary change. Why consider that possibility? Because moderate changes often don't lower it. The statement supplies the reason for the recommendation, so it is a premise. Now we need the answer that links that premise to the right conclusion.
Working the answers
- A
The author isn't rejecting the doctors' advice to use dietary changes. The author is explaining that those changes might need to be more substantial. The doctors didn't limit their recommendation to moderate changes, so pointing out the limits of moderate changes doesn't counter their broader suggestion.
- B
This correctly calls the statement a premise but attaches it to the wrong conclusion. The passage doesn't rank vegetarian diets above every diet containing meat in overall healthfulness. It makes a narrower point about changes that may be needed to reduce cholesterol. A claim about one possible benefit isn't a universal comparison of entire diets.
- CCorrect
The failure of moderate dietary changes is the reason offered for thinking that greater changes may be required. Read the two thoughts together: small changes often don't work, so a person may need a more dramatic change. C captures that supporting role and preserves the conclusion's “may.”
- D
This would explain why vegetarian diets succeed. But saying that moderate changes often fail doesn't explain the mechanism by which another diet lowers cholesterol. The statement motivates considering a more dramatic change; it doesn't give an explanation of that change's success.
- E
This turns the support around. The author doesn't first establish that dramatic changes are sometimes necessary and use that to prove moderate changes often fail. The failure of moderate changes is given as the starting reason. The possibility of needing dramatic changes is what the author draws from it. “Therefore” marks that move to the conclusion.
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.