Logical Reasoning

PT146 · S3 · Q4 According to economists, people’s

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

According to economists, people’s tendency to purchase a given commodity is inversely proportional to its price.

Conclusion (Obviously, then)

There are exceptions to the economists' general rule.

economists' rule: Tendency to purchase is inversely proportional to price.

Conclusion-translated: Sometimes people's tendency to purchase a given commodity is not inversely proportional to its price (i.e. the price rises and more want to buy it, or the price drops and fewer people want to buy it)

Evidence

Sure there's an example that fits the economists rule, where price and purchasing were inverted: the price of steel went down, and the amount purchasing went up.

But, there's a counterexample to the rule, where price and purchasing were aligned: the price of lace went down, and the purchasing of lace went down (if you can't rub it in the poor's face that they can't afford lace, then what's the point?)

Evaluate

The arguments on Main Conclusion and Role are intentionally more opaque. They don't want to make finding the conclusion an easy part of the process, because it's the main event on these questions. So any time we're doing Main Conclusion or Role, we're anticipating the conclusion probably won't be at the end with an obvious Therefore / Thus indicator word. But sometimes it will be last, usually on easier ranked problems like this Q4.

Instead, the Conclusion will usually be one of these two: - the first claim in the paragraph - a rebuttal

In this case the conclusion is at the end of the paragraph, and it does have some indicator words, although they're less obvious ones.

Obviously / evidently / clearly / apparently are frequently used on LSAT to show us an opinion, and of course when we're searching for the Main Conclusion we're searching for the opinion that the author supports.

Then / consequently / as a result are used to show the terminal end of a chain of thought, i.e. the conclusion of a train of thought.

This final sentence is the author's rebuttal, so if we're familiar with looking for Rebuttal Conclusions and First Sentence Conclusions on Main Conclusion and Role, we'll hopefully gravitate towards the rebuttal, since the first sentence contained an attribution to "economists".

The claim we're being asked about is the author's concession to the occasional validity of the economists point of view.

The four claims here go like this:

1. Attributed claim "according to economists, X"

2. Author's conceding some validity "here's an example about steel that matches X"

3. Author pivoting into premise "Nevertheless, here's a counterexample to X"

4. Author's rebuttal conclusion "Obviously, then, the economists are wrong"

Goal

They're asking us about #2, so we want something like,

The claim that more steel was purchased when it could be manufactured more cheaply plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

It is described as inadequate
Out of Scope: described as inadequate
It isn't described as anything, so that's reason enough to consider this answer inaccurate. The argument's conclusion is saying "there are exceptions to Rule X" and the claim we're looking at is an example of a data point that conforms to Rule X. If an author is trying to prove that "there are exceptions to Rule X", a data point that matches rule X isn't evidence for the conclusion's falsity. It's really just irrelevant. If we're trying to prove that there are exceptions, our argument has nothing to do with whether or not there are conforming examples.
1% picked this
It is described as an
Out of Scope: described Opposite: exception
It isn't described as anything, so that's reason enough to consider this answer inaccurate. The argument's conclusion is saying "there are exceptions to generalization X", but the claim we're looking at is an example of a data point that conforms to the generalization.
3% picked this
Correct
It is used to illustrate
Why this is right
Is there a generalization that, according to the argument, does not hold in call cases? Yes, the economists' general rule is a generalization. And according to the author's conclusion, there are exceptions to it; it does not hold in all cases. Okay, was this 2nd claim used to illustrate the economists' general rule? Yes! It was the author conceding that some data points do match that rule.
Skill tested: Role · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
86% picked this
It is the evidence that,
Out of Scope
Out of Scope: led economists to embrace Is there something that, according to the argument, led economists to embrace a false hypothesis? No, the argument never tells us a story about what caused the economists to espouse a general rule that has exceptions (calling that a false hypothesis is also a big stretch)
8% picked this
It is cited as one
Wrong Role Out of Scope: modifying
Nothing in the argument ever talks about modifying any assumption or rule made by the economists. The author is only proving that exceptions to the rule do exist. That doesn't mean you have to get rid of the rule or modify the rule. We can tolerate the existence of exceptions and still find a rule worthwhile. This is just descriptively, neutrally saying exceptions exist. This answer is also going on the wrong track as soon as it says "one of several reasons". That makes it sound like this was a Premise, but it was more like an Opposing point than a Supporting one. This is a concession to the economists' rule, because it's highlighting a case in which the rule applies.
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