PrepTest 118, Section 1, Question 1
The obsession of economists with consumption as a(44 more words not shown)
The author is arguing(1 more words not shown)
- Aeconomic well-being cannot(7 more words not shown)
- Bsatisfaction is possible(2 more words not shown)
- Cvalid measures of(4 more words not shown)
- Dmodern products are(4 more words not shown)
- Esatisfaction can provide(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Having to replace worn-out clothes isn't especially satisfying. But being able to afford new clothes seems better than being unable to replace them. Why couldn't that ability tell us something about economic well-being?
That's my hesitation about the author's complaint. Economists focus on consumption, and the author responds that using things up gives us little satisfaction. Okay, but how does satisfaction relate to economic well-being? The argument needs to explain that connection. We can accept that a depreciating car isn't a source of joy without deciding that consumption tells us nothing useful about the economy.
What we’re looking for
Still, the author's point is clear even if the reasoning leaves us unconvinced: economists are looking too narrowly at consumption. The examples of clothes, cars, and gasoline are supposed to show why that focus misses something. For the main-conclusion question, that's what we want. We aren't being asked to fix the argument or propose a better measure. Look for the claim that consumption alone doesn't capture economic well-being.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
This captures the criticism of treating consumption as the whole measure of economic well-being. The author thinks that focus prevents economists from understanding what economic well-being really is. The examples of replacing goods support that complaint. A doesn't require us to say consumption is completely useless; the problem is defining well-being solely in those terms.
- B
The author says consuming goods provides little satisfaction, not that we can obtain satisfaction without consuming anything. Those are different claims. We aren't told what else produces satisfaction or whether consumption might be required along the way.
- C
Measuring consumption and using consumption to measure economic well-being are different jobs. We could accurately count how much gasoline people use and still question what that number says about their well-being. The author challenges the second use, not our ability to measure consumption itself.
- D
Clothes wearing out doesn't mean manufacturers designed them to wear out early. That would add an explanation for the deterioration that the passage never gives. More importantly, the argument concerns what consumption tells economists, not manufacturers' intentions.
- E
Rejecting one measure doesn't establish a replacement. Satisfaction matters to the author's criticism, but the author never says we can turn it into an adequate numerical measure of economic well-being. E supplies a solution the argument hasn't proposed.
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.