Reading Comprehension

PT23 · S4 · P3 · Q16 Environmental Alarmists

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension 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

The debate over the environmental crisis is not new; anxiety about industry’s impact on the environment has existed for over a century.

https://assets.lsatlab.com/uploads/2022/04/pt23-p4.mp4

Topic

The changing attitudes toward the environmental crisis and how views on industry’s impact on nature have shifted and polarized over time.

Framework

Old / New

Main Point

The debate on environmental issues has become much more polarized compared to the past, largely due to a shift in the way people perceive nature and humanity's role in relation to it. (Most Valuable Sentence: P1, )

P1: Introduction – The Rise of Polarization

A century ago, there was concern about environmental damage, but today the debate is way more polarized, with environmentalists and industry at odds, making productive cooperation even harder.

P2: Contrast with the Past

Back in the day, people like George Marsh could harshly criticize environmental destruction and still be taken seriously—nobody felt the need to aggressively defend industry or deny environmental harms.

16.

Which one of the following practices is most clearly an application of Frederic Clements' equilibrium model of ecology?

  1. introducing a species into an

    Opposite: introducing a species

    Clements wants no human involvement in nature, so the idea of introducing a species is the opposite of his philosophy. This sounds like humans directly interfering with nature.

    1% picked this

  2. developing incentives for industries to

    Weak Match

    This is definitely headed in a pro-environment direction, but it's not nearly as strong as the correct answer. "Incentives" for industries to take corrective measures is like, "Jeez, we hope these new statutes we wrote will encourage industries to behave in ways that are less harmful to the environment". Clemens is more like, "There should be no industry. These incentives for industry to do better is better than nothing but still pretty awful."

    2% picked this

  3. using scientific methods to increase

    Opposite: using scientific methods

    Clements wants no human involvement in nature, so the idea of using science to try to improve plant/animal stability is the opposite of his philosophy. This sounds like humans directly interfering with nature.

    2% picked this

  4. using technology to develop plant

    Weak Match

    Sort of like (B), there's as aspect of this answer (stringent restrictions on technology) that seems to be looking out for the protection of the environment. But the answer is still talking about human involvement in nature (this time using technology to develop plant/animal resources.

    2% picked this

  5. Correct

    setting areas of land aside

    Why this is right

    This aligns best with "nature is most fruitful when least altered". Clements just wanted humans to stay out of it, and this answer has more of "humans: stay out" than any other answer does.

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

    93% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

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