PrepTest 136, Section 4, Question 23
Alex: Shrimp farming results in damage to the(58 more words not shown)
Their dialogue provides the most(14 more words not shown)
- Amost owners of(6 more words not shown)
- Bshrimp farming often(5 more words not shown)
- Cshrimp farming hardly(4 more words not shown)
- Dabandonment of a(8 more words not shown)
- Esome shrimp farmers(3 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If the business is profitable, why abandon it instead of keeping it running?
That is a reasonable question to bring to Alex's story. Alex says investors make quick profits from shrimp farming and then leave the farms, causing environmental damage. Jolene challenges the picture of a quick, easy venture: properly built farms take a long time to construct, are costly to operate, and have owners trying to keep them productive for years.
What we’re looking for
She concedes that some farms have been quickly abandoned. So the disagreement cannot simply be whether that ever happens. It concerns the usual economics and timeline of shrimp farming. For the disagreement question, look for a claim Alex supports and Jolene pushes against, rather than assuming her opening 'I disagree' rejects every part of Alex's statement.
Working the answers
- A
Eventually abandoning a farm is different from abandoning it quickly after a quick profit. An owner could operate a farm for many years and then abandon it, which would fit Jolene's account of long-term plans. The dialogue does not establish opposing views on whether most owners eventually do so.
- BCorrect
Alex presents shrimp farming as yielding quick profits before investors move on. Jolene counters that building proper farms takes time and operating them costs a lot, with most owners aiming for years of production. That supports a disagreement over the idea that shrimp farming often delivers a quick, easy profit.
- C
Jolene does not say that environmental harm is rare. She disputes the quick-profit-and-abandonment picture. Farms that operate for a long time could still harm the environment, so we cannot infer that she endorses C merely because she disagrees with Alex.
- D
Alex treats abandonment as a cause of environmental damage. Jolene does not tell us whether she accepts or rejects that connection. She acknowledges some abandonment while disputing how representative the quick-profit story is. We lack two opposing positions on D.
- E
Alex's criticism suggests irresponsible environmental conduct, but Jolene does not explicitly evaluate anyone's responsibility. Acknowledging some abandoned farms does not by itself establish that she considers their owners environmentally irresponsible. We cannot establish a disagreement over E.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.