#20 - The public’s welfare can be undermined by its own

[Dana D]

Complete question explanation

Main Point. The correct answer is A.


The conclusion of the argument (the main point) is the first sentence.

Answer Choice (A) This is the correct answer. This answer correctly restates the first sentence by rewording the 'public's welfare' as 'the best interests of the public' and elaborates that the public's tastes refers to their preferences for sensational stories .

Answer Choice (B) This answer fails to capture why journalists focus on sensation al or dramatic stories, and that is important. The idea that the public is undermining their own welfare is important and needs to be included.

Answer Choice (C) True - but similar to (B), it doesn't address why this happens or the idea of the public undermining itself.

Answer Choice (D) The paragraph is not focused on the shortcomings of journalism primarily.

Answer Choice (E) The author is not arguing this point at all.

[Littletiger1888]

Hi - I'm wondering why B is wrong. Is it because the word "detriment" is too strong?

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi LittleTiger,

This is a great example of a common main point trap. Answer choice (B) is an answer choice that correctly describes something that must be true based on the stimulus, but does not describe the main point of the stimulus. Journalists focus on the sensational is harmful to the public welfare supports the ultimate conclusion.

We can think through the stimulus like this:

Premise: Journalists focus on stories that will interest readers.
Premise: Readers are interested in the sensational more than the matter-of-fact articles on public importance
Conclusion: Public welfare is undermined its own tastes.

Answer choice (A) is the only choice that correctly identifies that main conclusion.

Hope that helps!
Rachael

[Naminyar]

Hello PowerScore,

How is “best interest of the public” in the answer choice has been equated with “Publix’s welfare”” in the conclusion?

The reason I did not pick A was that I had to make that assumption that those two things are the same.

[Claire Horan]

Hi Naminyar,

"Welfare" is a synonym for "well-being." The public's well-being is very close to the public's "interests." The LSAT can sometimes be a vocabulary test, unfortunately. However, I would disagree that this question required you to make any "assumptions." You do need to be careful to notice any changes in language, but remember that words will not always be repeated verbatim.

Good question and good luck studying!

[jm123]

I eliminated B because it said the "best interests." I do not see where the best interests of the public is mentioned in the stimulus so therefore I eliminated it. What am I missing here? I knew the first sentence was the conclusion but I do not know how the public's welfare can be undermined by its own tastes is equivalent to the best interests of the public sometimes fail to be served because of the sorts of preferences that people have. Why are we equating public's welfare with the "BEST" interest of the public?

[Adam Tyson]

You may be a little too focused on matching the words here, jm123, rather than the concepts. Our welfare is about our being healthy, happy, safe, etc. It is very much the same idea as out best interests, what is good for us. Answer A is an excellent paraphrase of the ideas presented in the first sentence of the stimulus, which is the main conclusion here. What else could be in our best interests other than to support our welfare, our well being? Isn't it bad for us to have our welfare undermined?

[cat.dog]

Why is the answer not C?

[KelseyWoods]

Hi cat.dog!

You're right that the statement in answer choice (C) is a type of conclusion because it's in a sentence with that "because" premise indicator (whenever you have "because" or "since" in a sentence, usually the half of the sentence modified by "because" or "since" is a premise that supports the other half of the sentence). But in this case, answer choice (C) identifies a sub-conclusion of the argument, not the main conclusion.

The argument breaks down like this:

Premise: Journalists tend to focus on stories that will stimulate their readers’ interest
Premise: Because sensation and drama serve this purpose more successfully than do matter-of-fact descriptions of political or social developments of far-reaching importance

These two premises support the sub-conclusion:
Sub-conclusion: newspaper articles containing the latter are all too often displaced by those that highlight rumors and implausible conspiracies

The sub-conclusion, in turn, supports the main conclusion:
Main conclusion: The public’s welfare can be undermined by its own tastes

Arguments with sub-conclusions can be tricky because conclusion indicators do not differentiate between sub-conclusions and main conclusions. So, instead, you have to focus on the relationship between the statements.

For any part of an argument, ask yourself two questions:

1.) Does it support any other statement in the argument?
2.) Is it supported by another statement in the argument?

Premises just support other statements but they are not supported by anything. Main conclusions are just supported by other statements, but they do not support anything. Sub-conclusions do both--they are supported by premises and they support the main conclusion.

In this case, the statement "newspaper articles containing the latter are all too often displaced by those that highlight rumors and implausible conspiracies" supports the statement "The public’s welfare can be undermined by its own tastes." In other words, it gives us a reason why we should believe that first sentence. Thus, it is a sub-conclusion rather than a main conclusion.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[Loyd_Xmas]

"one of the most commonly used complex argument forms is to place the main conclusion in the first sentence of the argument, and then to place the sub-conclusion in the last sentence of the argument, preceded by a conclusion indicator. This form is quite useful since it tends to trick students into thinking the last sentence is the main conclusion."

Killoran, David M.. The PowerScore LSAT Logical Reasoning Bible 2017 Edition (The PowerScore LSAT Bible Series) . PowerScore Publishing. Kindle Edition.