PrepTest 109

[lcid:3533] Prep Test 109 LSAT — Reading Comp — S2 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 1-7  .        Many political economists believe that the soundest  . indicator of the economic health of a nation Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Social Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Author on GNP's shortcomings (ignores human indicators like health, resources, employment, and services)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • The view of many political economists:
      • Gross national product (GNP) per capita is the best way to measure economic health (first sentence)
    • Definition of GNP per capita: value of goods produced divided by population (first sentence)
    • Author's view:
      • GNP ignores human factors that also affect the welfare of citizens (second sentence)
    • Comparison, according to the author:
      • Human indicators are a better metric than GNP, although sometimes more difficult to calculate or document (second sentence)
    • Examples of human indicators, according to the author:
      • Life expectancy, infant mortality, availability of resources, employment, and governmental services like education, water, medicine, transportation, and communication (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "many factors affecting residents' welfare that are not captured" (second sentence), "sometimes more difficult to calculate or document" (second sentence), "provide sounder measures" (second sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Economists' defense (human indicators follow GNP increases) and author's rebuttal (that doesn't always happen; GNP can obscure wealth discrepancies)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Economists' view:
      • Improvements in GNP eventually improve human indicators (first sentence)
    • Author's view:
      • Increases in GNP do not always improve human indicators (second sentence)
      • GNP per capita can obscure wealth discrepancies and give a distorted picture of the distribution of wealth across a society (fifth through last sentences)
    • Examples, according to the author:
      • Some nations that have improved their GNP still have bad human indicators, like infant survival, literacy, nutrition, and life expectancy (fourth sentence)
      • A country with a low population where a small percentage of residents hold most of the wealth can have a high GNP per capita (fifth sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "But, in actuality" (second sentence), "often fails to occur" (second sentence), "does not always reach" (third sentence), "often presents a distorted picture" (fifth sentence), "is a matter not merely" (sixth sentence), "frequently obscures" (sixth sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's argument in the real world (nations are realizing GNP is a bad metric and caring more about human indicators)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Some nations' views:
      • Nations are becoming less concerned with raising their GNP and more focused on actually improving the human indicators (first and last sentence)
    • Comparisons, according to the author/some nations
      • Prioritizing GNP can hurt the health of the nation, and a nation can still do well with a relatively low GNP (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "realize" (first sentence), "better directed away" (first sentence), "recognize" (last sentence), "may be endangered" (last sentence), "may thrive" (last sentence)

Main Point: Human indicators are far better for measuring a nation's economic health than GNP because the latter ignores important factors and can obscure wealth discrepancies.

Meta-Structure?

Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure: This passage skirts the line between a few different Meta-Structures, but we ultimately decided that it uses a Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure.* In such a structure, the author describes a view held by another person or group, and then criticizes their view. Importantly, the author's argument should focus primarily on why the view is wrong, unjustified, or misguided.

In this particular passage, we begin with the conventional method of measuring the economic health of a nation: gross national product per capita (GNP). Immediately after this introduction, the author makes it clear that they are not a fan of this method. They think it ignores other factors that affect citizens' welfare. Another, more elusive metric that considers "human indicators" is more accurate. Though some economists claim that improvements in GNP can cause improvements in those other factors, this is demonstrably false; some nations have a high GNP but low scores in human indicators. Also, GNP can be distorted by how a nation's wealth is distributed. Finally, the author says that nations are acknowledging the problems with GNP and electing to focus on improving with more accurate indications of their citizens' welfare.

In passages that use a Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure, the main point will be the author's central criticism or a summary of the criticisms. Since there isn't a moment in the passage that the author offers such a criticism, we can forge our own. Thus, the main point will be something like: "Human indicators are far better for measuring a nation's economic health than GNP because the latter ignores important factors and can obscure wealth discrepancies."

*You could make a very strong case that this is an Old Approach/New Approach passage, with "human indicators" as the new approach. You could also claim that this is a Correcting the Record passage. There is considerable overlap between these Meta-Structures and Criticizing a Viewpoint. Ultimately, we chose Criticizing a Viewpoint because the author is more focused on criticizing GNP rather than promoting human indicators (seriously, we counted the number of sentences dedicated to each). But selecting any of these Meta-Structures could also lead you to an effective understanding of the passage. Regardless of what you choose, the important thing to remember is how the passage presents a certain method that the author thinks is bad for a couple reasons.

Last Thoughts?

When a passage sets up a conflict between two things, try to memorize a workable definition of both before moving on to the questions. Many questions will refer to, for instance, how GNP is calculated rather than just saying “GNP.” So, try to remember that per capita GNP is the value of goods produced by a nation divided by its population and that human indicators include things like life expectancy, infant mortality, availability of resources, employment, and governmental services.

Question prompt

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

Credited answer: B

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

Question Type

Social Science

Strategy Overview

Review the claims in the last paragraph of the passage, and anticipate what a would serve counterexample to those claims

Answer Anticipation

This question is a very specific version of a Weaken question. We're asked to identify the answer choice that would serve as a "counterexample" to the claims in the last paragraph. A counterexample is an example that contradicts a broader point. For instance, suppose we offered the claim that "a country with a high per capita GNP always has low unemployment." A counterexample to the claim would be an example of a country with a high per capita GNP that has low employment. That country belongs to the group "high per capita GNP" countries, so we'd expect it to have low unemployment. But it doesn't have low employment, contradicting the original point. (Note that a country with low per capitia GNP with low unemployment wouldn't serve as a counterexample. The original claim only told us what to expect from "high per capita GNP" countries; it didn't reveal anything about "low per capita GNP" countries.)With that in mind, let's review the claim made in the last paragraph to anticipate what a counterexample might look like. According to our notes, "nations are realizing GNP is a bad metric and caring more about human indicators." If necessary, we can review the relevant portion of the passage: the author expects nations that focus on human indicators rather than trying to increase their per capita GNP can "thrive" even if their per capta GNP remains stable or lags behind (P4, S4).A counterexample to this view is a country increasing its economic health by raising its per capita GNP rather than human indicators. Let's look for that in the answer choices.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The decision by a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this present a country increasing its economic health by raising its per capita GNP rather than human indicators?

    Nope. This country decided "to focus on increasing the levels of human indicators," so it's not what we're looking for. Eliminate (A).

    Besides, the passage explicitly says that nations that do well according to human indicators can still have a "GNP remains stable or lags behind that of other nations" (P4, S2). So, (A) doesn't contradict the third paragraph.

  2. B
    The decision by a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem

    (B) Does this present a country increasing its economic health by raising its per capita GNP rather than human indicators?

    Yes! This describes a situation very similar to the one we anticipated: a nation focuses on increasing "the domestic production of goods" — which would increase the nation's GNP (P1, S1) — and that, in turn, increases economic success in the way that the author advocates measuring it.

    In fact, this is the hypothetical that the advocates of GNP invoke in their defense of the metric. They say that " improvements in per capita GNP eventually stimulate improvements in human indicators" (P2, S1). The author dismisses this, saying that it "often fails to occur" (P2, S2). But, if it did happen, it would clearly undermine the argument of the third paragraph and the passage's entire main point! (B) is definitely our answer.

  3. C
    The decision by a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does this present a country increasing its economic health by raising its per capita GNP rather than human indicators?

    No. This country decided "to focus on increasing the levels of human indicators," so it's not what we're looking for. Eliminate (C).

    Besides, there's no reason to think that improving human indicators wouldn't help the GNP. After all, improving the citizens' nutrition and increasing their life expectancy could result in more goods produced each year by the population. (C) is out.

  4. D
    The decision by a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this present a country increasing its economic health by raising its per capita GNP rather than human indicators?

    No. This country decided "to focus on improving its level of health as measured by human indicators," so it's not what we're looking for. Eliminate (D).

    Besides, the passage explicitly says that nations that do well according to human indicators can still have a "GNP remains stable or lags behind that of other nations" (P4, S2). So, (D) doesn't contradict the third paragraph.

  5. E
    The decision by a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this present a country increasing its economic health by raising its per capita GNP rather than human indicators?

    Not quite. This country focuses on increasing its GNP but doesn't improve its economic health as measured by human indicators. If this country improved its economic health, that would contradict the claims in the last paragraph. But since this country didn't raise its economic health as measured by human indicators, the situation plays out exactly how the author predicts. (E) is out.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion