PrepTest 153

[lcid:3711] Prep Test 153 LSAT — Reading Comp — S4 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 1-7  .       Forests are among the world's most valuable  . resources, both in a narrowly economic sense and in Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Science

Paragraph 1
  • Paragraph note
    • Background on forests, and an outline of the rest of the argument
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Forests - ecologically and economically "most" valuable
    • To make policy decisions on forest preservation, need to know pros/cons, especially on claims of :
      • Oxygen-renewing effects
      • Biodiversity preservation
Paragraph 2
  • Paragraph note
    • Analysis of first claim - oxygen-renewing effects
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Claim - The Amazon keeps CO2 down and oxygen up
    • Reality - Forests are oxygen-neutral
Paragraph 3
  • Paragraph note
    • Analysis of second claim - biodiversity preservation
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Claim - Preserving biodiversity requires preserving forests
    • Scientists - Preserving it might lead to new basic materials/medicines
    • Alternatively, there's a moral imperative to do so
Paragraph 4
  • Paragraph note
    • Analysis of commercial plantations effects on biodiversity
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Deforestation isn't happening as much as thought
    • Plantations have critics, and they do have less biodiversity (concession), but they allow for more biodiversity elsewhere
    • They also make up only 3% of forests
Main Point:
Two claims about forest preservation need to be scrutinized before good forest-preservation policy decisions can be made.

Key Lines:
7-15 - Main point and outline of the rest of the passage/argument
24-26 - View on first topic raised in lines 7-15
30-33 - View on second topic raised in lines 7-15
35-39 - More on second topic raised in lines 7-15
41-44 - Point of last paragraph, continuing discussion of second topic from the third paragraph

Meta-Structure:
More research is needed. The Author here calls out what information needs to be scrutinized in order to allow for good policy decisions. However, she never speaks to what those policy decisions should be, or how the information should inform the policy decisions, so there's no resolution or suggestion as to the specifics there!

Last Thoughts:
It's important to note in this passage that the Author is much more middle-of-the-road overall than she is on individual elements. The main point here is that certain claims need to be scrutinized in order to make smart decisions about forest preservation policy. However, she never gives any hint as to what those policies should be. But she does offer opinions on the two claims that need to be scrutinized.

For the first claim about the oxygen-renewing capabilities of forests, she clearly doesn't agree that that's a benefit (lines 25-26). For the second claim about biodiversity, it's less clear, as she brings up two reasons to believe that biodiversity should be preserved, but it's never framed as her opinion—it's what "scientists believe" or what "one could agree with."

So the Author here does have some opinions, but overall, she's much more interested in exploring what needs to be explored rather than coming to a definitive conclusion on those topics.

Question prompt

Which one of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

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

Question Type

Science

Answer choices

  1. A
    Critics of commercial plantations Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    Correct. Question Type:
    Must Be True

    Strategy Overview:
    Review the Author's statements on the critics of commercial plantations and then find an answer reflecting it

    Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
    The final paragraph was the one that dealt with commercial plantations, so we should head back there to see the Author's view on it, as well as see if there are any specific views attributed to critics.

    The Author here argues against two criticisms of plantations, so she'd generally disagree with critics of them, and thus we should find an answer reflecting that.

    The first criticism that the Author addresses deals with biodiversity on the plantations. She concedes that the plantations have less biodiversity, but she argues that they allow for more biodiversity in other forests. The second is that they don't make up that much forest land—3% by area.

    Let's find an answer reflecting that the Author disagrees with the Critics, with details reflecting these two points.

    Answer Explanation:
    (Lines 47-51) In suggesting that the Critics should consider something more carefully, this answer reflects disagreement with the Critics. And the Author does state that the plantations allow for more biodiversity in other forests—so the Critics should consider this relationship between commercial plantations and noncommercial forests. This answer reflects the Author's disagreement with the Critics and her first point of contention, so it's the correct answer.

    Key Takeaway:
    When an RC question asks about the Author's view of a specific viewpoint, you should review the passage to find two things. First, does the Author generally agree or disagree with that view? Second, what specific details does she bring up in addressing that view? If you can answer those two questions, you can find the correct answer.
  2. B
    Critics of commercial plantations Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Incorrect. (Paragraph 3) First, this answer connects something limited to the third paragraph (medicine) to something limited to the fourth (plantations). While both paragraphs discuss biodiversity, they do it through different topics that aren't directly connected. Second, the Critics of plantations want to preserve the forests, so, if anything, they'd be likely to buy into the potential for forests to have medically important plants.
  3. C
    Critics of commercial plantations Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Incorrect. (Line 22) Photosynthesis was mentioned all the way back in paragraph 2, connected to the discussion over oxygen generation. The passage moved on from that topic, so this answer connecting it to the Critics of the topic in the fourth paragraph is incorrect.
  4. D
    Critics of commercial plantations Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 50-51) The Author generally disagrees with the Critics of plantations, so she probably doesn't feel that they have an adequate understanding of the relevant issues here. And she specifically says that they don't understand the relationship between the commercial and noncommercial forests as far as biodiversity is concerned. Also, she doesn't speak to their understanding of the economic impacts, so that part of the answer is out of scope.
  5. E
    Critics of commercial plantations Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Incorrect. (Paragraph 4) Much like with answer (D), this answer suggests the Author has a positive view of the Critics, but the paragraph where she discusses this topic is largely dismissive of the criticisms.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion