Logical Reasoning

PT109 · S3 · Q21 Some government economists view their

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

Some government economists view their home countries as immune to outside influence.

Conclusion

If nations' economies → must look beyond are to prosper national borders

Intermediate Conclusion

Economies are always open systems.

Evidence

International trade significantly affects prices and wages.

Evaluate

This is a pretty difficult argument to parse (and a lot of filler to ignore). Consider just the structural clues:

Some economists say _____ . But ______ ; _______ . Just as physicists did ___ , government economists must do ____ .

We can tell from "some ppl say .... But", that the first sentence is background/counterpoint, and the author's argument starts after the "But".

A colon / semicolon can often be a way to show that the 2nd half of a sentence supports the 1st half. We can also use the Support Test to think about whether that makes sense.

Why should we believe that economies are always open systems? Because, international trade affects prices and wages.

The last sentence begins with an analogy (Just as X, Y). Analogies are good fodder for Strengthening / Weakening, but they don't really have any place in the Sufficient Assumption universe, where the logic has to work 100%.

Since the conclusion is conditional we can think about whether we'd rather think about it as, , or as, .

Either way you slice it, the idea of "what prospering national economies" require or what could make it impossible for a national economy to prosper is a New Idea in the conclusion.

On Sufficient Assumption, new ideas in the conclusion must be in the correct answer.

We did kind of hear about looking beyond national border, when they told us about international trade.

Goal

We need something like,

21.

The argument's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

  1. Correct

    A national economy cannot prosper

    Why this is right

    "unless" = "if it's not the case that ..." if at least one significant national influence on the economy ? economy has not been examined can't prosper by the govt economists International trade = a significant influence on the economy (it significantly affects prices and wages). Thus, we can derive the conclusion ... If government economists don't look beyond their national borders, then they aren't examining international trade, which is a significant influence on the economy, so their national economies can't prosper.

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

    59% picked this

  2. Economics is weakly analogous to

    Too Weak / Unrelated To Goal

    Even if this were a stronger version of what it's offering us, it still wouldn't do anything to lock in the brand new conclusion language of "national economies can't prosper".

    4% picked this

  3. Economic theories relying on idealizations

    Unrelated To Goal

    This is another answer getting tangled in the wording of the analogy. If an answer doesn't give us a rule that says "If ____ is true, then nations' economies can't prosper" then the answer is functionally useless to us. We'll never be able to prove "nations' economies can't prosper" unless the evidence or the answer choice gives us a rule with that wording. Since the evidence didn't, it's up to the answer choice.

    10% picked this

  4. International trade is the primary

    Unrelated To Goal / Premise Booster

    This takes something we already know and just amps up the volume a little bit. But every answer choice is useless to our goal of deriving the conclusion, if it doesn't include the wording about "whether or not nations' economies will be able to prosper".

    9% picked this

  5. Some government economists have been

    Weak / Unrelated To Goal

    This answer is also useless, since it doesn't give us any rule that would allow us to derive that "when ___ is true, nations' economies can't prosper".

    17% 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