Logical reasoning PrepTest 129 · Section 1 · Question 11

Incorrect. This answer conflates the two motives, so neither speaker would agree with this. Luis believes that only research that's expected to have practical applications should be funded, so he'd disagree with this answer. Cynthia believes that theoretical research should be funded to help us understand the universe, so she'd disagree that funding should be done because of potential practical applications.

Incorrect. This answer is a bit tricky, but we can't commit either to having an opinion on it. Luis would say that this study meets a necessary condition ("only") for receiving government funding, but that doesn't mean that he is committed to funding it—that would require him to have established a sufficient condition for government funding. Cynthia states that the government should fund theoretical research, but she doesn't discuss whether they should also fund practical research, so we can't say for sure she'd be against this research.

Incorrect. Cynthia disagrees with this answer—her whole argument is meant to support government funding of theoretical research. And while it can seem as if Luis would agree with this answer, we can't commit him to that! Some of these theoretical projects may be expected to yield practical benefits—for example, a study of how sunlight affects wind patterns may be a theoretical exploration that is expected to help with designing wind turbines. As such, he doesn't necessarily believe that no theoretical research should be funded.

Incorrect. Luis disagrees with this answer, as he states that the government should fund only research with the possibility of yielding new technologies. Cynthia, though, doesn't necessarily agree with this answer, as she could believe that the government should fund practical research as well as theoretical research—unlike Luis, she doesn't establish the "only" type of projects the government should fund when she discusses theoretical research.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Point at Issue

Stimulus Summary:
C: Companies fund research to make money. Science wants to understand the universe. So governments should fund research into theoretical knowledge.

L: Governments fund research into tech that benefits all of society, so they should only fund research into useful areas.

Answer Anticipation:
In Point at Issue questions, we need to identify areas that both speakers discuss, and then of those, which they have different opinions on.

Here, the overlap between the two speakers is on government-funded research. While they both think that some of it should happen, they disagree over what areas that research should focus on.

For Cynthia, the government should fund research into "theoretical knowledge" so that scientists can work to understand the universe. Luis, on the other hand, believes that the government should fund research that has practical applications.

Note that this is, at its heart, a debate over what is a valid motive behind government-funded research—and we know that motive is a common relevant element on the LSAT. Let's find an answer that reflects their diverging views on this.

Answer Explanation:
Luis believes that the government should fund "only" projects that are expected to have practical applications, so he'd disagree with this answer. And Cynthia supports government funding of theoretical research meant to expand our knowledge of the universe, so she'd agree with this answer, making it correct.

Key Takeaway:
This is yet another question where the motives/goals behind certain actions are central to the logic and finding the right answer.