Logical Reasoning

PT118 · S1 · Q1 The obsession of economists with

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

The obsession of economists with consumption as a measure of economic well-being has prevented us from understanding the true nature of economic well-being.

Conclusion

Economists' obsession with consumption as a measure of economic well-being has prevented us from understanding the true nature of economic well-being.

Evidence

We don't get much satisfaction out of our clothing wearing out, our cars depreciating, and the gas in our gas tanks needing to be replaced.

Evaluate

Whenever we're doing Main Conclusion or Role, we first remind ourselves before reading the paragraph that the Conclusion will usually be earlier than the Evidence (that's the trick they play on those two question types).

Since there are only two claims in this paragraph, we could proactively ask ourselves,

The first sentence does sound like the author's opinion, because she's saying,

How is this supported? Why should be believe that by obsessing over consumption we're missing the true nature of well-being?

The author's premise is super aloof. We have to work to understand it, but she's saying when we fill up our gas tanks, when we buy a new car, or when we have to buy new clothes, we are consuming. From the economists' point of view, this is helping economic well-being. More consumption = more well-being.

But the author is citing these examples as the opposite of "more well-being". The author thinks we are sad that are clothes now look worn and our car now looks old and our gas tank is thirsty. Even though it's good for the economy that we have to buy more stuff, it doesn't feel like it's good for our well-being.

Goal

This question stem is not the traditional "Find the Main Conclusion" version of a Main Conclusion question. It's more like the occasional variation we see where instead of asking for the Main Conclusion, it asks for the Main Point. These are functionally similar to Main Conclusion in terms of how we read the paragraph, but the answer choices might be somewhat different. Rather than just regurgitating the actual claim that was the Main Conclusion, the answer to Main Point may speak to an implied conclusion or synthesize the conclusion and the evidence.

Thus, we want to look mainly for a paraphrase of the first sentence, but if the answer also seems to bring in the second one or an implied idea, we can live with it.

But the answer needs to express that , or .

1.

The author is arguing that

  1. Correct

    economic well-being cannot be defined

    Why this is right

    This is naming a sort of assumption or rephrasing we can get from the first sentence. Economists are obsessed with measuring economic well-being via consumption, and our author thinks that obscures the true nature of economic well-being. Thus, our author must believe that something other than (or in addition to) consumption is really the true nature of economic well-being. The author supports this with the 2nd sentence, which purports to provide examples of consumption that don't seem to represent upticks in true well-being.

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

    92% picked this

  2. satisfaction is possible without consumption

    Unsupported

    The author never provided any examples where satisfaction had occurred, even though consumption hadn't. The author's main point is closer to saying "true economic well-being goes beyond consumption". The author's main point is about how to measure economic well-being, not about the broad concept of satisfaction.

    2% picked this

  3. valid measures of consumption cannot

    Too Strong: cannot

    The author was never saying it's impossible to devise a valid measure of consumption. The author's argument is about how to best measure economic well-being, and the author hasn't said anything to suggest that it's impossible to devise a valid measure of that, either.

    1% picked this

  4. modern products are designed for

    Wrong Emphasis: modern products

    The author's argument is about what is a proper measure of economic well-being. This sentence isn't talking about how to measure economic well-being at all. We can tell that this couldn't be the author's conclusion because there's no support provided for the contention that modern products are designed for early obsolescence. The examples cited aren't necessarily modern products and no one said they went obsolete early (just eventually).

    0% picked this

  5. satisfaction can provide an adequate

    Unsupported

    The author is rejecting the economists' measure of economic well-being (consumption), but she hasn't proposed an alternative to take its place. She is only trying to argue that their obsession obscures the true nature of economic well-being, not that "satisfaction can be a good quantitative measure of well-being".

    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.

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