Logical Reasoning

PT101 · S2 · Q12 For years scientists have been

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

For years scientists have been scanning the skies in the hope of finding life on other planets.

Conclusion

The dream of finding alien life is destined to remain a dream.

Evidence

They've been using ever-increasingly sophisticated equipment (sometimes costing hundreds of millions of dollars) for years to scan the skies in hopes of finding life on other planets, and yet no shred of evidence of life has been found.

There's no reason to think they will be more successful in the future, no matter how much money they invest.

Goal

We probably want an answer that means something like the last sentence, although when the question stem says Main Point (rather than the usual Main Conclusion), they don't necessarily go with an explicit claim, and they sometimes package in Conclusion plus Evidence.

But it should essentially sound pessimistic about the worthwhileness of spending money trying to find alien life.

12.

Which one of the following most accurately states the main point of the argument?

  1. There is no reason to

    Too Strong

    This author isn't trying to convince us that there's no reason to believe life exists on other planets. She's only trying to convince us that there's no reason to think we'll find evidence of life existing on other planets.

    15% picked this

  2. The equipment that scientists employ

    Opposite

    The author thinks the equipment is pretty much as sophisticated (and expensive) as it could get. The fact that we're using the best equipment we can and still not getting results is what combines to fuel her pessimism that our dream of finding alien life will never be realized.

    0% picked this

  3. Correct

    Scientists searching for extraterrestrial life

    Why this is right

    This means essentially the same thing as the last sentence --- "the dream of finding extraterrestrial life will remain a dream" is equivalent to saying "you ain't gonna find extraterrestrial life". This is an opinion the author defends based on the supporting ideas that we've been searching for years with top notch equipment and haven't uncovered a shred of evidence, and there's no reason to think more time/money would make a difference.

    Skill tested: Main Conclusion · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    71% picked this

  4. Only if scientists had already

    Too Strong / Assumption

    This answer feels more like something the author is assuming than something she's concluding. She never actually says anything normative like 'justified' -- she is certainly making us think maybe this is a waste of money / maybe we should stop trying, but she's never said anything to that effect. We couldn't even accuse her of assuming this idea because the "only if" is too strong. Does our author clearly believe that "if they haven't found evidence yet, then continued searching is unjustified"? No, she's not acting like "the fact that we haven't found evidence yet is sufficient to show that more searching would be unjustified", because she's factoring in other things such as "the fact that we haven't found anything yet + the fact that we're using really expensive / sophisticated equipment + the fact that we don't expect more time or money to make a difference".

    8% picked this

  5. We should not spend money

    Normative vs. Descriptive

    This is very close. It sounds like an opinion our author probably holds. But our author doesn't say anything normative like "should". She just gives us the raw material for us to come away with the notion that we probably should stop spending money on this stuff. But our goal on Main Conclusion is to pick the explicit conclusion, if there is one. The last sentence is an explicit conclusion, and we have an answer choice, (C), that means the same thing as this last sentence. So while I would probably be okay picking this answer choice if they hadn't provided a match for our explicit conclusion, I don't want to invent a position that the author never actually said. We have a much safer answer in choice (C), which is an opinion she expressed and defended.

    6% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free