Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT119 S1 P1 Q7 Explanation

Definition of Prosperity

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsPrimary PurposeSociety

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

Economists have long defined prosperity in terms of monetary value, gauging a given nation’s prosperity solely on the basis of the total monetary value of the goods and services produced annually. However, critics point out that defining prosperity solely as a function of monetary value is questionable since it fails to recognize quality of life may in fact initiate economic activity that, by the economists’ measure, bolsters prosperity.

It can also happen that communities seeking to increase their prosperity as measured strictly in monetary terms may damage their quality of life and their environment. The situation of one rural community illustrates this point: residents of the community value the local timber industry as a primary source of income, and they the harvest limitations would lower their wages or even cause the loss of jobs.

But critics of the economists’ view argue that this view of the situation overlooks a crucial consideration. Without the harvest limitations, they say, the land on which the community depends would be seriously damaged. Moreover, they point out that the residents themselves cite the abundance of natural beauty as one of the will thus lose much more—even understood in monetary terms—if the proposed harvest limits are not implemented.

Economists respond by arguing that to be a useful concept, prosperity must be defined in easily quantifiable terms, and that prosperity thus should not include difficult-to-measure values such as happiness or environmental health. But this position dodges the issue—emphasizing ease of calculation causes one to disregard substantive issues that directly influence real and quantifiable measure, but it is a poor substitute for an accurate appraisal of literary merit.

What this question is testing

Primary Purpose

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
7.

The primary purpose of the passage

Answer choices

  1. Wrong Side of Debate5% picked this

    argue that there is an inherent and potentially detrimental conflict between two schools of thought

    This answer correctly suggests that there is a debate (between economists, who want to defined prosperity in strictly financial terms, and critics, who think that prosperity needs to be measured in non-monetary ways as well). But the author doesn't present this debate to ultimately lament that there is a potentially detrimental conflict between these two sides. She isn't a dispassionate moderator who is just presenting the debate. She is involved in it. She presents this debate to agree with the critics.

  2. Too Neutral19% picked this

    summarize and illustrate the main points of the conflict between two schools of thought over the definition

    This feels true but incomplete. The passage is discussing the main points between two schools of thought (economists vs. critics) in regards to the definition of the concept "prosperity". But we should be turned off by the neutral sounding verbs "summarize and illustrate". The final two sentences are clearly coming from the author's voice, and she is taking the side of the critics against the economists. When our author clearly expressed an opinion, then the purpose should sound more opinionated.

  3. Out of Scope: alternative definitions3% picked this

    question one school of thought’s definition of a certain concept and suggest several

    The passage was definitely questioning the school of thought known as economics, in regards to how it defines the certain concept of "prosperity". This vibes well with the Challenge Position feel we were looking for. Did the author suggest several possible alternative definitions? No. The author mentioned things that are left out of the "purely monetary" definition, but the author doesn't offer any alternative definitions.

  4. Correct70% picked this

    criticize one school of thought’s definition of a certain concept by providing examples that illustrate the implications of

    Why this is right

    The passage was definitely criticizing the school of thought known as economics, in regards to how it defines the certain concept of "prosperity". This vibes well with the Challenge Position feel we were looking for. Did the author provide examples illustrating the implications of adhering to the economists' definition of prosperity in purely monetary terms? Yes, an increase in the sales of hats / shades / sunscreen would look like an increase in prosperity in terms of their definition, but if it's resulting from the ozone layer's weakening ability to protect us from UV harm, shouldn't we consider that a decrease in prosperity? An increase in money from unlimited timber harvesting would increase prosperity in terms of the economists' definition, but since unlimited harvesting would seriously damage the land the community relies on and the natural beauty they appreciate, this should be considered a decrease in prosperity.

    Skill tested: Primary Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Out of Scope: exclusive territory3% picked this

    bring one school of thought’s perspective to bear on a concept traditionally considered to be the exclusive territory

    The two "schools of thought" in this passage would be 1) economists: define prosperity purely in terms of money 2) critics/author: define prosperity in terms of money and also some non-monetary factors The author didn't write a passage to say that one of those schools of thought is now venturing into a field dominated exclusively by the other school of thought. Naturally these two schools of thought wouldn't normally intermingle, because they are just contradictions of each other. This answer would describe a hypothetical passage in which the perspective of math is brought to bear on a concept like beauty, which is traditionally considered to be the exclusive territory of aesthetics / art criticism.

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