Logical reasoning PrepTest 126 · Section 4 · Question 8

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Point at Issue

Stimulus Summary:
L: Incomes grew by a larger percentage at the bottom than at the top, so the bottom's economic prosperity grew relative to the top.

M: The amount incomes grew was larger at the top, though, so the bottom's economic prosperity didn't grow relative to the top.

Answer Anticipation:
Larew and Mendota are discussing a common issue that we've seen on the LSAT—percentages versus amounts! Larew focuses on percentage increase, whereas Mendota discusses the amount of the increase in relative income.

We know that percentages and amounts aren't the same thing. Larew, therefore, only discusses percentages, and Mendota discusses both but agrees with Larew on the higher percentage increase. That's not the point at issue between them!

Rather, it's their conclusions where they differ (as highlighted by Mendota starting her rebuttal with, I disagree, in response to Larew's conclusion). Larew believes that the higher percentage increase means that the lowest income quartile saw a relative increase in economic prosperity compared to the highest; Mendota believes that the higher amount increase for the upper quintile means they had the larger gain in economic prosperity. Let's find an answer reflecting that disagreement.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights the disagreement over how to measure increases in economic prosperity. Larew believes percentage increase is the proper measurement, so he'd agree with this answer. Mendota believes the important metric is the amount of the increase, so she'd disagree with this answer.

Key Takeaway:
Point at Issue questions can still bring up common elements in logic—based questions. When you spot a common feature, use it to help you understand the question!

Incorrect. No one argues that the changes in economic prosperity for the lowest quintile should be framed relative to the highest. While the two speakers are comparing those two groups, they're not debating whose economic prosperity is the proper" measuring stick—rather, they're debating whether percentage increase or amount increase is the proper point of comparison.

Incorrect. Both speakers compare the changes in average income (though they do so using different metrics), so they'd both agree that it's an appropriate comparison.

Incorrect. The debate is over the relative increase in economic prosperity between two groups, not the absolute increase in such prosperity. Both agree that incomes went up for the lowest income quintile, they just question whether that group made up ground compared to the highest quintile.

Incorrect. Mendota agrees with Larew that the percentage increase was greater for the lowest economic quintile than the highest, so this is a point of agreement between them.