Logical Reasoning

PT102 · S3 · Q17 People cannot devote themselves

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

People cannot devote themselves to the study of natural processes unless they have leisure, and people have leisure when resources are plentiful, not when resources are scarce.

Conclusion

Agriculture did not begin under conditions of drought and hunger (it began when resources were plentiful)

Evidence

Agriculture required the active study of natural processes in order to make complex discoveries about how various plants reproduced and grew to maturity. Devoting yourself to the study of natural processes requires leisure, and leisure requires plentiful resources.

Evaluate

Around 50% of all Main Conclusion questions involve a conclusion that is a rebuttal to someone else's thinking. Knowing this tendency helps us to find the conclusion here. "Although anthropologists claim X ... " is our signifier that the author is probably trying to rebut their claim.

If we follow that hint, we see that she definitely is doing just that. They have claimed that agriculture began under conditions of drought and hunger, and our author lays out a case that agriculture, based on what it requires, would have to have began during a time of plentiful resources.

Goal

Find an answer that sounds like .

17.

The argument is structured to lead to the conclusion that

  1. whenever a society has plentiful

    Too Strong

    The author said that when plentiful resources are present, people have leisure. Were we told that whenever people have leisure, some members of society study natural processes? No, it said that leisure was required for people to devote themselves to studying natural processes. This is acting like leisure guarantees people will devote themselves. That was not said.

    22% picked this

  2. plants cannot be cultivated by

    Too Strong: cannot be cultivated

    This is an extreme idea the author wasn't defending. She definitely thinks that early agriculturalists needed to discover how plants work, but it could be practical knowledge, not theoretical. Either way, this is not close to the Main Conclusion which should be "agricultural developed in a societies with plentiful resources".

    8% picked this

  3. Correct

    agriculture first began in societies

    Why this is right

    This rebuts the anthropologists position. Agriculture didn't begin under conditions of drought and hunger. It began under conditions of plenty. How is it supported? - developing agriculture happened from people having lots of time to study complex relationships in natural processes, which requires leisure, which requires plentiful resources.

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

    65% picked this

  4. early agricultural societies knew more

    Unsupported Comparison

    The author isn't building any case about "who knows more about natural sciences": early agricultural societies or early nonagricultural societies.

    1% picked this

  5. early societies could have discovered

    Out of Scope: by accident

    This feels like the opposite of what the author is presenting. She's saying that learning how to cultivate plants required deliberate study, not lucky accident.

    4% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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