Logical reasoning PrepTest 117 · Section 3 · Question 13

Incorrect. This answer neglects the entire portion of the argument about the Mayor's personal interests. Additionally, the Council Member never says that real estate development fees are the "best" way to raise revenue just a proposed way to raise revenue.

Incorrect. The Council Member clearly believes this, but her argument is about the motives of the Mayor, so this answer doesn't encapsulate her main point.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Main Point

Stimulus Summary:
The city needs money, but the Mayor refuses to impose real estate development fees.
Mayor — The fees are so high that new buildings won't be built and we'll lose money
CC Member — The Mayor's family is in real estate and would lose money if the fees pass
Conclusion — The Mayor is putting family over city

Answer Anticipation:
The argument here brings up a debate over real estate development fees in a certain city that needs revenue. The Mayor argues against them, and the City Council member then questions the Mayor's motives. In general, when motive is raised on the LSAT, it's relevant to the question. In putting forward a judgment about the motives of the Mayor, the City Council Member is stating an opinion on the opposing point, making it likely that that opinion is the main point of the argument. And in explaining the personal interest that the Mayor is putting ahead of the city, the Council Member is supporting that opinion.

Therefore, the main point of this argument is that the Mayor is putting family above city, and we should look for an answer paraphrasing that.

Answer Explanation:
This answer reflects the Council Member's main point—an opinion on the Mayor's self—interested dealings. It's backed up by an explanation of what those personal interests are.

Key Takeaway:
When brought up, motive is important on LSAT questions. And the author's opinion on an opposing point, when present, is generally the main point of the argument. The author's opinion on the motives of an opposing point? Very likely to be the main point of the argument.

Incorrect. This answer isn't stated in the argument, nor is it an assumption of the argument. This answer is a potential rebuttal to what the Mayor argues, but the Council Member doesn't rebut his claims, instead going after his motives. Additionally, it's possible the Council Member agrees with the Mayor that reducing the number of building starts would hurt revenue, but that the proposed fees wouldn't actually lower building starts.

Incorrect. This answer reflects a conclusion of the argument since it is introduced with a "thus." However it's an intermediate conclusion as this family/personal interest is used to support the claim that the Mayor is putting that interest above the city.