Logical Reasoning

PT140 · S1 · Q11 Although large cities are generally (copy)

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

Although large cities are generally more polluted than the countryside, increasing urbanization may actually reduce the total amount of pollution generated nationwide.

Main Conclusion

Increasing urbanization may actually reduce the total amount of pollution generated nationwide.

Intermediate Conclusion (thus)

A given number of people will produce less pollution concentrated in a city than spread among many small towns.

Premise

City residents rely more on mass transit and live in smaller, more energy-efficient dwellings.

Anticipate

Whenever we do Main Conclusion and Role, we remind our brain that the conclusion is only the last claim like 20% of the time. The vast majority of the time the main conclusion is some Pivot/Rebuttal claim or it's in the first sentence.

When we listen actively for whether this first sentence is an Attribution the author might rebut or an opinion she might support, we see that it sounds like an opinion, "increasing urbanization may reduce pollution". And the rest of the paragraph supports that claim. The "thus" on the final sentence signals another conclusion, but that conclusion is there to support the first sentence.

Goal

They're asking us about the main clause of the first sentence, which is our main conclusion.

11.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the argument by the claim that increasing urbanization may actually reduce the total amount of pollution generated nationwide?

  1. It is used to support

    Bad Conclusion Match

    We're looking for Conclusion, not support, so we can stop reading at that word. This also misrepresents the Conclusion by naming a claim that was never even said.

    11% picked this

  2. It is a statement offered

    Bad Description

    The claim isn't introduced to call into question the city-vs-countryside pollution claim. The author actually concedes that cities are more polluted (that's the "although" framing). The urbanization claim is offered despite that, not against it. Anytime an author says, "Although claim 1, claim 2", the author is admitting that both claims are true, not saying that claim 2 contradicts claim 1.

    12% picked this

  3. It is a statement serving

    Background

    The claim plays a major logical role — it's the conclusion of the argument!

    2% picked this

  4. It is a premise offered

    Premise

    The claim is the conclusion, not a premise. And the conclusion isn't the opening concession prefaced by "Although". A claim attached to "although" will never be the conclusion. Any time we see, "Although claim 1, claim 2", claim 2 is the one that's part of the author's argument.

    3% picked this

  5. Correct

    It is a claim that

    Why this is right

    The claim the rest of the argument is designed to establish is more simply known as The Main Conclusion, which is exactly what we were looking for.

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

    71% 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