October 2010 LSAT Section 3 Question 2

Since there is no survival value in an animal's having an organ that is able to function when all its other organs ha...

Bonnie on February 15, 2020

Main Point | Example 3

Example 3: I got this one wrong as I initially thought the main point was the zoo needing to close if its budget were cut. My rationale was based on the zoo director addressing the group. Certainly, his ultimate concern would be the potential closing of his zoo. Upon revisiting Example 3 and your explanation for the correct answer (false economy)it's still not sinking in... Any additional insight you can share would be great. Thanks!

Replies

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Annie on February 16, 2020

Hi @Bonnie,

This question asks you to find the "main conclusion" of the Zoo Director's argument. So, you have the full argument in front of you, you are simply looking for the main point of the argument. When trying to solve one of these questions, it's best to figure out the answer for yourself before turning to the answer choices.

Here, the zoo director is making an argument for why the zoo should stay open and why the budget should not be cut. He states at the beginning that cutting the budge is false economy (aka that it will not actually save money), and then provides 3 reasons why this is true. These three reasons are: that the zoos budget is less than 1% of the budge, that the zoo attracts tourists, and that it adds to the cultural climate which attracts business. These three reasons support the main conclusion- aka that cutting the budget would be false economy. Therefore, answer (B) is correct.

Bonnie on February 17, 2020

Hi Annie! Thanks for working through the example. Now I get it.