PrepTest 159, Section 3, Question 8
Sinking large, obsolete pieces of equipment in coral(49 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(34 more words not shown)
- AIt is intended(7 more words not shown)
- BIt is a(7 more words not shown)
- CIt is a(16 more words not shown)
- DIt is the(5 more words not shown)
- EIt is a(4 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A sunken boat could give fish or crabs somewhere to live. That's a benefit. Is it enough to call sinking the boat ecologically sound?
I'd want to know what happens to everything else nearby. Providing shelter for some animals could also disrupt other species or damage the area's ecological balance. Even the phrase “much-needed habitats” invites a question about what changed from the time before this equipment was there. But marine life having existed earlier wouldn't show that it doesn't need more habitat now. We can grant the habitat benefit and still ask about other consequences.
The author makes that modest objection: the practice may be ecologically unsound. The author doesn't claim that harm definitely occurs or that it definitely outweighs the benefit. There could be costs the proponents haven't considered.
What we’re looking for
For the role question, work backward from that conclusion. Why might the practice be unsound? Because it may upset the ecological balance in unknown ways. The statement we're asked about supplies the reason for the author's warning.
Working the answers
- A
A summary would capture the argument as a whole. This statement supplies a particular reason for the conclusion; it doesn't summarize both the reason and the conclusion that the practice may be unsound.
- B
To refute a claim is to argue against it. The author doesn't attack the possibility of upsetting the ecological balance. The author uses that possibility to challenge the proponents' confidence in the practice.
- C
This describes the other side's habitat claim. The proponents think the habitat benefit establishes that the practice is sound, and the author says that benefit may not be enough. But the question asks about possible ecological disruption, which is the author's own supporting reason.
- D
The main conclusion is that sinking the equipment may be ecologically unsound even if it provides needed habitats. Possible disruption of the ecological balance explains why the author reaches that conclusion. Keep the claim being supported separate from the reason supporting it.
- ECorrect
It is a premise: a statement offered in support of the conclusion. Unknown disruption could make the practice unsound despite its benefit. That's how this statement helps the author argue that the proponents haven't settled the matter.
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.