Logical Reasoning

PT3 · S4 · Q5 The high cost of production

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

The high cost of production is severely limiting which operas are available to the public.

Conclusion

The author wants to ditch the big corporate sponsors so opera companies can produce more obscure operas.

Evidence

The corporate sponsors are the ones forcing only-the-greatest-hits programming.

Evaluate

The author treats corporate demands as the only thing standing in the way of obscure operas. But there is a quieter possibility: famous operas might be the only ones that bring in enough ticket sales and donations to pay for themselves. If that's true, cutting the corporate money doesn't free smaller operas — it just shrinks the budget so much that only famous operas remain affordable.

Goal

The right answer will show that without corporate sponsors, opera companies still couldn't afford to produce anything beyond the famous operas.

Which one of the following, if true, would weaken the argument?

A few opera ticket purchasers
No Impact
Whether some ticket-buyers attend for the experience rather than for specific productions doesn't bear on whether opera companies could afford to produce less famous operas under the new funding model. The author's claim is about which operas can be produced, not why audiences attend.
3% picked this
The reduction of opera production
No Impact
The argument is about what happens after reducing production budgets to a level supportable by box-office plus donations. Whether sponsors remain willing to support operas at the higher budget level doesn't affect whether the smaller budget supports less famous operas.
9% picked this
Correct
Without the support of large
Why this is right
This is the alternative explanation the author missed. If, without corporate sponsors, opera companies could only afford to produce the most famous operas anyway, then cutting the sponsors doesn't free up less famous operas — it just shrinks the budget while keeping the same lineup. The whole point of the plan was to expose audiences to less famous operas, and this answer says that won't happen. The conclusion is undermined.
Skill tested: Weaken · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
73% picked this
Large corporate sponsors will stop
No Impact
This is consistent with the plan, not against it. The author is already proposing to do without corporate sponsors. That sponsors will withdraw if denied control is exactly the situation the author is willing to accept. It does not undermine the conclusion that less-famous operas will then be produced.
0% picked this
The combination of individual donations
No Impact
The plan already involves reducing production budgets so they fit what box-office and donations can support. Whether donations and box-office can match corporate funding is irrelevant — the author isn't claiming they will; the author is saying budgets will shrink to match. The conclusion is unaffected.
14% 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