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...

eric.antonio on October 18 at 02:36AM

Conclusion

One of the troubles I had with the four questions was finding the conclusion for each of the prompts. What is a manner that can assist with identifying the conclusion better for MP questions, and also LR questions?

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

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on October 21 at 02:02PM

I think there are three broad things that I would recommend.

First, the conclusion is the thing the author is trying to convince you of. As you read an argument, ask yourself what that author is trying to sell you, and that is the conclusion.

I think a second approach is to look for a statement that is proved by some other part(s) of the passage, but itself is not used to prove anything else. That is, it must have some logical support from another statement but the conclusion is not supporting anything else.

Third, as a concrete test to see what supports what, I like the therefore/because test. If we can say "x therefore y" and it makes sense, then X supports Y. Likewise if we can say "Y, because X" then X supports Y. Let's look at an example.

"Raising taxes would enable us to properly defend ourselves, so we should raise taxes"

If we say "raising taxes would help defend, therefore we should raise" this makes perfect sense. However if we say "we should raise taxes, therefore raising taxes will help us defend ourselves" this doesn't make sense. Therefore, the first clause in the initial statement supports the second clause.