PrepTest 138

[lcid:3648] Prep Test 138 LSAT — Reading Comp — S1 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 15-22  .        David Warsh's book describes a great  . contradiction inherent in economic theory since 1776,  . when Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Social Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Paradox introduced (Pin Factory vs. Invisible Hand)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Warsh's view: There's a contradiction in Smith's economic theory between the "Pin Factory" and the "Invisible hand" (first and last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "great contradiction" (first sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Background on Pin Factory (more employees = more efficient) and Invisible Hand (competition leads to public goods)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Smith's views:
      • Pin Factory: Increased size results in increased efficiency, as each employee can produce more when they specialize in one task (first and second sentences)
      • Invisible Hand: Self-interest can promote the common good without anyone intending to (third sentence)
    • Example of Invisible Hand:
      • Businesses sell goods to make money, but end up making people who buy them happy (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Paradox explained (Pin Factory model reduces competition, undermining Invisible Hand model)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparison between Pin Factor and Invisible Hand, according to the author:
      • The Pin Factory's emphasis on increasing returns leads to bigger businesses and eventually results in monopolies (second and third sentences)
      • But the Invisible Hand requires a lot of competition, so it rests on the assumption that returns diminish as businesses get bigger (fourth through last sentences)
    • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to the author:
      • A large business’s ability to achieve larger scale and lower costs causes smaller firms to be driven out of the industry, which eventually causes industries to be dominated by a few monopolies (third and fourth sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "are opposed" (first sentence); "create a natural tendency" (third sentence); "to work properly, there must be many competitors" (fifth sentence); "depends on the assumption that returns to scale are diminishing" (last sentence)

Paragraph 4

  • Paragraph note
    • Marsh on why Pin Factory was de-emphasized by economists (harder to represent mathematically)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Marsh's view:
      • Economists de-emphasized the Pin Factory model because they aspired to represent models mathematically (like science), and the Pin Factory was very hard to represent with math (third through last sentences)
    • Comparison, according to Marsh:
      • The economics of diminishing returns (Invisible Hand) was easy to represent mathematically, while increasing returns (Pin Factory) was very difficult (last sentence)

Paragraph 5

  • Paragraph note
    • Recent update (Economists finally found ways to represent Pin Factory mathematically)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Economists failed for a long time to describe the Pin Factory, even though the Pin Factory model was apparent in many industries; finally, in the 1970s, economists succeeded in representing the Pin Factory with enough rigor to make it mainstream (first through last sentences)
    • Example of industries that followed the Pin Factory model: railroads (first sentence)
    • Definition of "underground river": increasing returns (third sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "increasing returns obviously characterized many industries" (first sentence); "had finally found ways to describe the Pin Factor with the rigor needed to make it respectable" (last sentence)

Main Point: Since it was seen to contradict the Invisible Hand and was hard to model mathematically, the Pin Factory (increasing economies of scale) was de-emphasized in economics for hundreds of years until recent mathematical models described it and entered the mainstream.

Key Lines?

Paragraph 1, Sentences 1-2 (P1, S1-S2) - A paradox is introduced

P2, S1 - One-half of the paradox is described

P2, S3 - The other half is described

P3, S4-S5 - The paradox is stated

P4, S2-S3 - A question is asked and answered

P5, S3-S4 - A recent development in economics relevant to the paradox

Meta-Structure?

Paradox/Resolution: This passage utilizes a Paradox/Resolution Meta-Structure.* The author starts the passage by introducing a contradiction, which we can view as a paradox. But there's an interesting facet to the paradox here. This paradox surrounds the contradiction between the Pin Factory and the Invisible Hand, as the former assumes increasing returns to scale, but the latter argues for decreasing returns. And while the author does show that the Pin Factory math has been shown to work out and has entered mainstream economic thought, that doesn't resolve the inherent contradiction between the two concepts. If anything, it makes it worse by suggesting that there are increasing returns to scale in some industries, thus undercutting a central assumption of the concept of the Invisible Hand!

So, usually, the main point in a Paradox/Resolution passage is the author's resolution. But here, the author doesn't quite resolve the paradox. So, the main point can't be the resolution. However, the paradox is still central to the passage, and so we should explore what aspect of the paradox was key to this passage. Since the passage focuses much more on the Pin Factory/increasing returns to scale — talking about how it leads to a contradiction, how it was downplayed for centuries, and how it's recently entered mainstream economic thought — that half of the paradox is the main topic of the passage. We summed up the author's thought on this half of the paradox, as you can see from what we wrote above.

*We think that's the best fit for the passage, but there are several other answer options you could go with. Either Debate Meta-Structure — Describing or Resolving a Debate — could work for this passage. The passage also uses a Question/Answer Meta-Structure in the fourth paragraph, but this Meta-Structure could be applied to the entire passage as well. We'll use this as an opportunity to remind you that there's usually more than one Meta-Structure that could fit the passage!

Last Thoughts?

This is a tough passage, both conceptually and in the details. It also has eight questions associated with it, which tells us that the LSAT felt there was a lot to ask about. However, the passage is broken up nicely into paragraphs that each deal with a single and distinct concept, so we're going to rely on our paragraph-by-paragraph notes to ensure that we can find the right information as needed, and we're not going to rely on our memory for these questions — especially for a topic that we're unfamiliar with, our memories are bad! (Unless you're an Econ major, in which case, this is a nice present!)

Question prompt

The passage states which Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Social Science

Strategy Overview

Remind ourselves of the main point of the passage, then head to the answers, focusing on those that line up with the main point and then using our notes/the passage to find the correct answer

Answer Anticipation

This question stem provides no indication as to the topic of the correct answer or where it’ll show up in the passage. As such, we’ll need to rely on our big-picture understanding of the passage to answer this question. We should start by reminding ourselves of the main point (either by reviewing what we said after reading the passage or by rereading our answer to the main point question). From there, we can head to the answer choices.If something in an answer choice doesn't seem familiar and isn’t reflected in our notes on each paragraph, we shouldn’t check the passage to see if it was mentioned. Instead, we’ll table it and move on to the next answer choice. If something seems inconsistent with the main point, we can eliminate it. If something seems familiar, consistent with the main point, or reflected in our notes, we’ll use our notes/highlights/underlines to find the part of the passage that proves the answer choice must be true. If we can find that confirmation, we’ll select that answer choice and move on.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The only way that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Is this consistent with the passage's main point or reflected in our notes?

    Not really. This answer should raise red flags right away because it uses strong, SCOTUS-y language ("[t]he only way") that is hard to support and thus unlikely to show up in the correct answer to a Must Be True question. For this reason, we can eliminate — or at least table — (A) without reviewing the passage.

    If we had to review the passage to eliminate (A), we could use our notes to locate the section that discusses the specialization of workers. There, we'll see that such specialization is one way to see increasing returns to scale (P3, S2), but there's no indication that it's the only way, so this answer is unsupported.

  2. B
    Economics fails in its Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Is this consistent with the passage's main point or reflected in our notes?

    Nope. This answer runs counter to the main point of the passage, so we can eliminate (B) without hesitation. That main point suggested that the Pin Factory model wasn't accepted into the economic mainstream because, unlike decreasing returns to scale, it couldn't be rigorously described with math. That main point suggests that economists stick to models that they can describe with math. So, if economics fails in its quest to be scientific, it can't be because its models lack mathematical rigor. And that's assuming that it does fail at that goal — there's no indication in the passage that it does.

  3. C
    The Pin Factory model's Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem

    (C) Is this consistent with the passage's main point or reflected in our notes?

    Yeah! This answer lines up with the main point of the passage, which explains that the Pin Factory model wasn't accepted into the economic mainstream until it could be modeled with enough mathematical rigor to make it respectable. That means the Pin Factory model's failure to gain prominence wasn't a problem of ideology. Based on just the main point, we could select (C) and move on.

    But if you need to confirm that this is "stated" in the passage, our notes would point you to the fourth paragraph. There, the author presents Warsh's explanation as the true explanation (note that the author says "As Warsh explains" instead of "As Warsh argues/thinks/believes"). Warsh explains that the reluctance to endorse the Pin Factory model "wasn't about ideology" — it was about the math (P4, S3). So, this answer choice is indeed stated in the passage, and we can confidently select (C) and advance to the following question.

  4. D
    Under the Pin Factory Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Is this consistent with the passage's main point or reflected in our notes?

    Nope. In fact, our note for the third paragraph ("Paradox explained (Pin Factory model reduces competition, undermining Invisible Hand model)") tends to undermine this claim. If there's less competition under the Pin Factory model, it would seem that companies would be more likely to exert monopoly power.

    If you had to review the passage to eliminate (D), your notes would point you to the third paragraph. In that part of the passage, the author says that under the Pin Factory model, industries "tend[] toward monopoly" (P3, S3), so the passage contradicts this answer choice.

  5. E
    Adam Smith did not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Is this consistent with the passage's main point or reflected in our notes?

    No. Neither our notes nor the main point brings up Adam Smith's viewpoint. Plus, this answer choice uses strong, SCOTUS-y language that expresses a high degree of certainty ("did not"). This bold language is hard to support and thus unlikely to appear in the correct answer to a Must Be True question. For these reasons, we can eliminate — or at least table — (E) without reviewing the passage.

    If we had to review the passage to eliminate (E), we'd see that Smith's viewpoint is mentioned only in the second paragraph. And while he did propose the Pin Factory and Invisible Hand models, that doesn't guarantee he didn't recognize the tension between them. He might have been well aware of their contradictory assumptions and argued that they applied in different situations or left it up to future scholarship to resolve that issue! Since this question concerns what Smith recognized, we'd need a specific statement reflecting his viewpoint to back this answer up, and we don't get one.

What this tests

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.

View all discussions Start a discussion