PrepTest 133, Section 3, Question 4
Sam: Mountain lions, a protected species, are preying(42 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AHumans should not(8 more words not shown)
- BThe preservation of(15 more words not shown)
- CThe preservation of(15 more words not shown)
- DAny measures to(12 more words not shown)
- EIf the population(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Both species are protected, but one is eating the other. That leaves us with a real choice: do we stay out of it, or protect the sheep even if doing so means restricting the mountain lions?
Sam says to let nature take its course and hope the sheep survive. But does protecting both species necessarily mean doing nothing? Perhaps the sheep are especially vulnerable and need active help. Their shared protected status doesn't by itself settle what humans should do.
What we’re looking for
Meli takes that other side: we must act to ensure the sheep survive, even if limiting the mountain lions is necessary. So the disagreement is about intervention. Sam says we should leave this interaction alone; Meli says we should intervene to protect the sheep. We can identify that disagreement without deciding whose policy is better or predicting exactly what will happen to either species.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Read the “not” carefully. Sam agrees that humans should not intervene to protect the sheep from the mountain lions: let nature take its course. Meli rejects that position and says we must do what we can to protect the sheep. The answer gives the same policy question we predicted, phrased from Sam's side.
- B
Neither speaker states this general rule comparing an entire species with a few individuals. Meli's position in this particular conflict doesn't establish a principle about every such tradeoff, and Sam doesn't say that losing a few individuals is more important than preserving a species. We need opposing stated positions, not a philosophy we might imagine behind them.
- C
This compares how easy it is to preserve predators and prey in general. The speakers discuss what to do about these mountain lions and sheep, not which broad category of animal is easier to protect. We cannot assign them opposite answers to that comparison.
- D
Neither speaker says limiting the mountain lions would drive them extinct. Limiting a population and eliminating a species are very different outcomes. Their policy disagreement doesn't establish opposing predictions about the lions' extinction.
- E
They disagree about what humans should do, but that doesn't mean they disagree about this definite prediction. Sam hopes the sheep survive without intervention; Meli wants to take action to ensure survival. Neither statement settles whether limiting mountain lions is the only way the sheep can survive. Don't replace the clear policy disagreement with an unstated guarantee about the future.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.