PrepTest 139, Section 1, Question 8
When weeding a vegetable garden, one should not(43 more words not shown)
The principle underlying which one(14 more words not shown)
- AIt is a(27 more words not shown)
- BOne should not(23 more words not shown)
- CIf one is(41 more words not shown)
- DOne who is(41 more words not shown)
- EWhen one is(30 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Pulling weeds helps the garden. Why stop before they're all gone?
Because getting the last few might take far more effort than they're worth. Imagine spending hours hunting for tiny remaining weeds when removing them would produce only a slight improvement in the harvest. The argument accepts that fewer weeds means a more productive garden. It still says the saved effort is worth more than that final improvement.
So the principle isn't that weeds are good, or that perfection is impossible. It's that a small additional benefit may not justify the work required to achieve it. We can improve something without insisting on eliminating every last defect.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for an argument with the same underlying principle. Match the reason for stopping, not just a recommendation to leave some imperfections. We need an acknowledgment that removing defects helps, followed by the judgment that fixing the last few no longer repays the effort.
Working the answers
- A
This says defects are required for happiness. That would be like saying the garden needs some weeds in order to flourish. Our argument says the opposite about productivity: fewer weeds are better. Its reason for leaving a few is the effort of removing them, not a benefit the remaining weeds provide.
- B
This warns that radical change will probably make the person worse off. The gardener doesn't think removing all the weeds would make the garden less productive. Removing them would help, but the small additional improvement isn't worth the effort. B rejects the proposed change for a different reason.
- CCorrect
Each imperfection makes the personality worse, just as each weed reduces the garden's productivity. Yet removing the last few imperfections isn't worth the time, just as finding and pulling the last few weeds isn't worth the effort. Both arguments recommend accepting a small remaining disadvantage to avoid a disproportionate cost in effort.
- D
Impossible and not worthwhile are different. The gardener might be able to find every weed by searching long enough; the argument says that search wouldn't be worth it. D instead says the goal cannot be achieved at all, which supplies a different reason for giving up on perfection.
- E
Here, removing a small imperfection can create a larger one. In garden terms, that would be like pulling a small weed and causing a bigger weed to grow in its place. The original argument doesn't claim that removal creates worse weeds. It balances the benefit of removal against the effort required.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.