PrepTest 150, Section 2, Question 8
One should not confuse a desire for money(41 more words not shown)
The claim that one should(22 more words not shown)
- AIt is a(11 more words not shown)
- BIt is the(5 more words not shown)
- CIt is a(11 more words not shown)
- DIt is a(9 more words not shown)
- EIt alludes to(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe I want money so I don't have to go to work tomorrow.
That's a desire for freedom, not necessarily a desire to own more things. The examples in the passage work similarly: education, travel, and prestige are things money can obtain without themselves being material possessions.
Even when someone does want a physical object, the object might be a means to something else. Imagine buying a plane because it lets you travel where you want. The goal isn't simply to have a plane sitting there; it is the experience or activity the plane makes possible. That gives the author's point a second line of support.
What we’re looking for
The question asks about the opening warning not to confuse wanting money with wanting possessions. That is what these reasons are trying to establish. The author isn't applying it to reach another conclusion afterward; the rest of the passage explains why we should accept it.
Working the answers
- A
The direction is wrong. The author doesn't start with this as an accepted general rule and then deduce things about particular people. Instead, the examples of nonmaterial purchases and the observation about why people want goods support the opening claim. They are reasons for it, not conclusions drawn from it.
- BCorrect
It is the overall conclusion: don't treat the desire for money as though it were the desire for material possessions. Money can buy nonmaterial benefits, and even material goods are often wanted for what they let us do. Both observations support that main distinction.
- C
A subsidiary conclusion would support another, larger conclusion. Imagine the author added, 'Therefore, people who want more money aren't necessarily as greedy as we assume.' Then the money-versus-possessions distinction might become a step toward that further claim. But that extra conclusion isn't in this argument. Here the distinction is the final point the reasons support.
- D
The statement does recommend how to think about the desire for money, but the passage doesn't test it with counterexamples. Education, travel, and the activities enabled by goods support the recommendation. A counterexample would work against it, which isn't what these examples do.
- E
The passage doesn't identify this as a problem and then offer a separate solution in a later conclusion. The warning is itself the point. The remaining statements explain why confusing the two desires is a mistake; they don't propose another action that solves a previously established problem.
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.