Logical Reasoning

PT131 · S2 · Q18 Contrary to Malthus's arguments

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

Contrary to Malthus's arguments, human food-producing capacity has increased more rapidly than human population.

Conclusion

Malthus's prediction will come true: insufficient food will doom humanity to war, pestilence, and famine at some point in the future.

Evidence

Even though our capacity to produce food has outpaced the growth in human population, at some point a lack of biodiversity will erode our capacity to produce food, because these advances in agricultural often compromise biodiversity.

Evaluation

Claim 1: Contrary to Malthus [counterpoint to Malthus] Claim 2: Yet, [support for author's argument] Claim 3: Therefore, [author's conclusion] Claim 4: Because, [support for author's argument]

We're being asked about the first claim, which we know is on the other side of the Author's Pivot (but / yet / however). It's a counterpoint, going against both Malthus and the author, who ultimately thinks Malthus's prediction will come true, even if this first fact goes against Malthus's arguments.

Goal

Look for something like "an idea that goes against Malthus's arguments", but it has a repercussion that actually goes with Malthus's prediction / with the author's conclusion.

18.

The statement that human food-producing capacity has increased more rapidly than human population plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

  1. It is a hypothesis the

    Not a Hypothesis Not Refuted

    A hypothesis is a statement that attempts to explain a given phenomenon. The first statement isn't trying to explain any phenomenon. Also, the argument accepts it as true; it doesn't try to prove it false.

    4% picked this

  2. It is a part of

    Bad Conclusion Match

    There is no conclusion present that a well-known view is misguided. We have no idea whether Malthus's view is well-known, and the author isn't arguing that it's a misguided view, since she is arguing that his prediction will probably be proven correct.

    7% picked this

  3. It is an observation that

    Too Strong: "supports"

    This answer is very close to being fine. The first claim certainly qualifies as an observation. Since we initially called it a Counterpoint to Malthus's argument, it might not sound tempting to say that this first claim actually supports Malthus's position. However, Malthus's position (i.e. prediction) is that insufficient food will doom humanity. The fact that food-production has outpaced population growth goes against that. But I can see being tempted by this answer, because the author is suggesting that the agricultural advances may temporarily allow food production to outpace population growth, but because those advances harm biodiversity, they could ultimately erode our ability to produce food, thus supporting Malthus's prediction that we will have insufficient food. But that first claim itself doesn't support Malthus's position. It's only in relation to what else agricultural advances often do that we find support for Malthus's position. So it's not accurate to say this first claim actually supports Malthus's position.

    42% picked this

  4. Correct

    It is a general fact

    Why this is right

    It is a general fact. The argument does offer a reason to believe it will eventually change. Eventually, we won't be able to say that "food production has outpaced population growth" because our agricultural advances could very well compromise biodiversity, which would diminish our food production capabilities.

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

    45% picked this

  5. It is a hypothesis that,

    Trap

    Not a Hypothesis Out of Scope: "inadequate evidence" As stated for choice (A), this is a fact not a hypothesis. Moreover, there's no discussion of inadequate evidence for this fact. Our author accepts this fact.

    1% 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