PrepTest 127, Section 3, Question 19
Leslie: I'll show you that your quest for(95 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(10 more words not shown)
- AErich would not(11 more words not shown)
- BErich should not(14 more words not shown)
- CErich is irrationally(14 more words not shown)
- DErich can be(9 more words not shown)
- EErich is engaging(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Would you trade a hand for possession of the world? Different people might answer differently. What matters here is Erich's answer: he would not. Leslie uses that refusal as evidence about what Erich values.
Leslie then compares that hypothetical trade with the treasure hunt. Erich is harming his body to pursue something worth less than the whole world, even though he would not give up a hand for the world itself. Leslie wants him to see the quest as inconsistent with the priorities his refusal reveals.
I'm not sure the comparison settles it. Losing a hand is different from, say, neglecting sleep or eating poorly during a project. Those health costs might be reversible, while losing a hand is not. And Leslie's claim about how Erich must value his whole body still needs to fit the particular harm at issue. We can question that comparison without losing track of the point Leslie is making.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for Leslie's main conclusion. It appears in the opening sentence: Erich's quest for the treasure is irrational. The tablet example and the comparison with his bodily well-being are the attempted reasons for that judgment.
Working the answers
- A
Erich's refusal supports this statement, but Leslie uses it as evidence for the claim about the treasure hunt. The conclusion goes beyond identifying the trade he would reject and evaluates the pursuit he is actually undertaking.
- B
Leslie argues against this particular pursuit, involving a particular cost and a treasure worth less than the whole world. That doesn't establish a rule against every risk to physical well-being, regardless of the gain. B broadens the judgment beyond the comparison Leslie makes.
- C
Less valuable than the whole world does not mean worthless. The treasure could have substantial value while Leslie still thinks pursuing it is inconsistent with Erich's priorities. C adds the claim of no value, which the argument never makes.
- D
Leslie intends to convince Erich, but that doesn't establish that Erich can or will be convinced. He might reject the comparison or remain unmoved by it. Whether the argument persuades him is different from its conclusion that his pursuit is irrational.
- ECorrect
Erich is behaving irrationally by pursuing the treasure. That restates Leslie's first claim, which the rest of the argument tries to demonstrate. Identifying it doesn't require accepting that the hypothetical loss of a hand is a perfect comparison with the actual costs of the quest.
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.