#23 - Councilperson X: We have an obligation to help ensure

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Point At Issue. The correct answer choice is (D)

This question is more challenging than the previous question. Councilperson X’s argument is that if a generating plant is to be built, the proposed design should be used since that design allows for the lowest rates. Councilperson Y’s argument is that the proposed design would lead to air quality so poor that it would outweigh the benefits of the lower rates. Like the previous problem, the conclusion of each speaker’s argument is critical:

• X’s conclusion: “It must be the design we endorse if we agree that we have no choice but to approve construction of a new plant.”

Y’s argument is a bit more difficult to analyze because the conclusion is left unstated. Y’s implicit conclusion is that the proposed plant design should not be used since the negatives of the proposed plant would outweigh the benefits.

Answer choice (A): This is the most attractive wrong answer, and about one in five students select this answer. Councilperson X’s statement makes it clear that there is no certainty regarding the council’s actions: “if we agree that we have no choice but to approve construction of a new plant.” Hence, X’s position on whether the council should recommend a new station is at best uncertain. The answer choice is also problematic because it does not specify the “proposed design.” Both speakers refer specifically to the new design, whereas this answer choice refers to “a new generating station” and not necessarily a new station with the proposed design.

Answer choice (B): Councilperson Y likely agrees with this statement, as indicated in the second half of Y’s first sentence. However, X’s position on this statement is uncertain (no mention of quality of life is made), so this answer is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): Similar to answer choice (B), councilperson Y agrees with this statement, as indicated in the second half of Y’s first sentence. However, X’s position on this statement is uncertain (no mention of air quality is made), and thus this answer is incorrect.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. Using the Agree/Disagree Test, Councilperson X would agree with the statement whereas Councilperson Y would disagree with the statement.

Answer choice (E): Councilperson X agrees with this statement, as indicated in X’s second sentence. Councilperson Y’s position on this statement is less certain. Y appears to agree with the statement, although a case can be made that Y’s opening comments simply indicate that searching for low rates is not the only job the council has. Regardless, there is no disagreement present and this answer is incorrect.

[sdb606]

You write that Y's conclusion is implicit. But since the conclusion is not explicitly stated, I eliminated D. When is it ok to draw an implicit conclusion? On tons of other questions, answers are wrong because they don't pass the Fact Test. Why is that not the case here?

I chose B because I thought X would disagree with B on the basis that he's saying they should approve a plant that damages air quality (according to Y). So clearly, he thinks it is NOT the council's responsibility to improve air quality, otherwise he wouldn't advocate for approving the plant. Is Y's assertion that the plant would damage air quality to be taken as fact that applies to X as well?

[Jeremy Press]

Hi sdb,

Think about using the Agree/Disagree Test with respect to Councilperson Y's argument. Ask Y, "Do you agree that if a new generating station is to be built, the council should endorse a plant of the type specified by the design in question?" Can you imagine Y saying "yes" to that question, or even, "I don't care"? After Y asserts unambiguously that the council's job is to not lower the quality of life in the community, and after Y's commitment to the fact that the proposed design would (definitively) damage air quality (a clear quality of life issue), and with Y knowing about the electricity rates issue (since Y responds to X)? No way. So even though Y doesn't explicitly say it, Y is entirely committed to the opposite of answer choice D. That's enough to satisfy a Fact Test as applied to Point at Issue questions.

The problem with answer choice B is that Councilperson X's statements aren't definitive enough for us to tell if Councilperson X would have to disagree with that statement. Councilperson X certainly could say, "Yes, I agree the council has that responsibility, but our responsibility to keep rates low is far more important." That wouldn't contradict anything in X's argument, or the ultimate conclusion. So since we can't get a definitive answer from Councilperson X on answer choice B, it's a wrong answer here.

I hope this helps!

[aghartism]

Re (D), I found it interesting that if the conditional here is interpreted as a material conditional, it's hard to see why councilperson Y would reject (D) based on the stimulus. Based on the stimulus, Y would think the consequent false, but it is uncertain how Y would feel about the antecedent. And a material conditional with a false consequent can either be true or false, depending on whether the antecedent is false or true, respectively.

This confirms my suspicion that even material-looking conditionals on the LSAT are not to be understood as being material conditionals.

[Adam Tyson]

D is true because Y would oppose that design regardless of whether a new station needs to be built or not. Y believes that the cost to the environment of such a design would outweigh the stated benefits of that design. In other words, Y opposes that design, while X supports it. Don't make it more complicated than that!