Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT148 S3 Q7 Explanation

Expert: Some people claim

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsStrengthen

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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.

Stimulus

Expert: Some people claim that, since food production has thus far increased faster than population has, there is no need to be concerned about widespread food shortages. These people fail to recognize that the planet's resources allow for food to be produced at only a few times production will be possible. Thus, widespread food shortages are inevitable.

What this question is testing

Strengthen

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion more likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that are consistent with the argument but add no real support, or that strengthen a claim the argument doesn't make.

Winning move

Locate the gap between evidence and conclusion, then pick the choice that closes it.

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.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the

Answer choices

  1. Opposite (if anything)1% picked this

    The world's resources, though limited, are

    This discusses renewable resources, which does not support the notion of inevitable food shortages. In fact, it suggests that food production could persist, not diminishing the perceived supply issues.

  2. Weaker Impact9% picked this

    Food resources from the world's oceans will eventually be

    This states that food from the ocean will be fully utilized, which definitely helps one to argue that food shortages will happen. But the central doubt in the argument is that the Earth can produce a few times what it currently does, and we don't know whether Earth's population will reach that level of demand. It's possible that we would exhaust the food in the ocean but still have enough food from land.

  3. Weakens1% picked this

    The world's population has recently remained fairly stable because of falling

    Indicating that the population has recently remained stable undermines the argument for future shortages, as a stable population implies the current food supply may suffice, countering the prediction of shortages.

  4. No Impact6% picked this

    Periodic regional food shortages have occurred at least briefly

    This recounts historical periodic regional food shortages. It does not directly impact the argument about future widespread shortages, since isolated past events may not point to global future trends, and since a regional shortage is not nearly as dire as a widespread shortage.

  5. Correct83% picked this

    Population will continue to grow at least briefly when food production has reached

    Why this is right

    This explicitly states that the population will continue to grow even after food production reaches its maximum level. It directly strengthens the argument by foreseeing a future mismatch where demand from population growth will surpass food supply, leading to shortages.

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

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