Logical Reasoning

PT129 · S2 · Q12 Criminologist: The main purpose

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

Criminologist: The main purpose of most criminal organizations is to generate profits.

Conclusion (therefore)

Criminal orgs will try to get more involved in biotech and IT.

Evidence

Criminal orgs' main purpose is to generate profits.

Biotech and IT promise to generate enormous profits.

Evaluate

We often scan the conclusion of Sufficient Assumption for a New Concept, because we know that this new concept must show up in the correct answer.

In this conclusion, we have "criminal orgs", which were discussed in the evidence and "biotech and IT" which was discussed in the evidence.

The new concept would be "try to become increasingly involved in".

Why is the author saying that criminal orgs will try to be increasingly involved in biotech and IT?

Biotech and IT are going to generate profits, and that's the main purpose of criminal orgs.

Goal

If we're going to roll that into one conditional prephrase, it sounds like the author is assuming that,

.

12.

The conclusion of the criminologist's argument is properly inferred if which one of the following is assumed?

  1. If an organization tries to

    Reversal

    This puts the conclusion language we're looking for on the trigger side of a conditional, so it's useless to us. If we reversed this rule then it would be a correct answer. We KNOW that criminal orgs' main purpose is to generate profits. We're trying to PROVE that they will become increasingly involved in areas like biotech and IT. Conditional answers have to go FROM what we know TO what we're trying to prove. This has that reversed.

    5% picked this

  2. At least some criminal organizations

    Unrelated to Goal Too Weak

    While this supports the argument that criminal organizations would become involved in the areas of biotechnology and information technology, it does not prove the conclusion that they will indeed do so. We know at a glance it can't prove the conclusion because it doesn't have the new concept in the conclusion: "try to become increasingly involved"

    14% picked this

  3. Criminal organizations are already heavily

    Unrelated to Goal

    While this may be tempting for someone who misread the argument's conclusion and thought it meant simply that criminal organizations will become involved, this misses the point that we need to prove that the criminal organizations will become increasingly involved (i.e this doesn't have the New Concept in the Conclusion).

    6% picked this

  4. Correct

    Any organization whose main purpose

    Why this is right

    This has the New Concept: "try to become increasingly involved in"! This rule starts, "If your org's main purpose is to generate profits" Okay, we know that description applies to criminal orgs, so we know that this is a useful rule. This will tell us something about criminal orgs. We want it to convince us that they will try to become increasingly involved in Biotech and IT. This says they'll try to become increasing involved in [any tech revolution that promises to generate enormous profits]. Do Biotech and IT qualify as [a tech revolution that promises to generate enormous profits]? Yes! That's what we were told about them. Okay so we can apply this rule to criminal orgs and derive that they will try to become increasingly involved in biotech and IT.

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

    72% picked this

  5. Most criminal organizations are willing

    Unrelated to Goal Too Weak

    This would only establish that criminal organizations would become willing to be involved in the areas of biotechnology and information technology, but not that we could expect them to actually do so. Furthermore, we don't actually know that enormous profits would be sufficient profits in the eyes of the criminal organizations. We know at a glance this can't prove the conclusion because it doesn't have the new concept in the conclusion: "try to become increasingly involved"

    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