Logical Reasoning

PT110 · S2 · Q18 Editorialist: The positions advanced by

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

Editorialist: The positions advanced by radical environmentalists often contain hypotheses that are false and proposals that are economically infeasible.

Conclusion (But)

Extremists have a positive role to play on environmental issues.

Evidence (For)

The social and political inertia around environmental issues is so stubborn that even small progress happens only when the public fears environmental disaster, whatever the reasons for the fear.

Evaluate

Whenever we read Main Conclusion / Role, we know to look out for upside down args (80% of the time the conclusion appears earlier than the evidence). Specifically, we know that - 65% of them are Pivot / Rebuttal conclusions - 25% of them are First Sentence conclusions

The first sentence definitely sounds enough like an author opinion, that we might have suspected it would be the conclusion. But instead of supporting that first idea, the argument then pivots away from it as the 2nd sentence begins.

When we see the PIVOT, we'd start thinking, "oh, this is probably the conclusion", and then when we see the Support Indicator "for" (FABS = for, after all, because, since), we know it's the conclusion because it's being supported.

Goal

Look for a restatement of the idea that extremists (i.e. radical environmentalists) can play a positive role when it comes to environmental stuff.

18.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the editorialist's argument?

  1. The little progress that has

    Too Strong

    We want an encouraging statement, saying that these extremists can play a positive role. This sounds like it's just saying something damning about them. This is also an unstated idea, so we shouldn't be attracted to it.

    5% picked this

  2. Correct

    Radical environmentalists, by promoting their

    Why this is right

    This is our closest match for "there is a positive role to be played by the radical extremists". Is it supported? Why should we believe that the radicals stimulate progress by promoting their views? Because environmental progress only happens when people fear environmental disaster, and the radicals' views help to stoke that fear. This is definitely an unusual correct answer. It's a bit gisty, rather than a restatement of our explicit conclusion, and it's never really spelled out in the argument that by promoting their views, the radicals are helping to make the populace fear environmental disaster. It's just implied / suggested, and assisted by common sense.

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

    73% picked this

  3. Social and political inertia is

    Premise

    Since this answer isn't about the radical extremists, we wouldn't do more than glance at it. This restates the evidence about inertia and fear, with "most effectively" added on top. The editorialist uses the claim about inertia to support the conclusion about extremists; it is not what the editorialist is ultimately arguing for.

    7% picked this

  4. Radical environmentalists often put forth

    Unsupported

    The editorialist never says the radicals adopt untenable positions on purpose to create fear. It's possible that they know that they need to strike fear into the public's heart in order to nudge environmental policy, but it's also possible that they're just overly passionate and ill-informed and that's why they adopt untenable positions.

    12% picked this

  5. Radical environmentalists advocate positions without

    Too Strong

    We want an encouraging statement, saying that these extremists can play a positive role. This sounds like the negative sense of the opening sentence, only this says something even stronger than what we we told (no regard for facts).

    3% 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