to the top

#14 - Currently, no satellite orbiting Earth is at

cardinal2017
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:35 am
Points: 14

I know it is an Method of Reasoning ---AP Question, and I went to B) bx I mistakenly thought the final conclusion is something at the end of the story

and so thought the dangerous debris cluttered in the space is what the author was ultimately trying to warn us of.

UGH..

Is 'after all' always a premise indicator? I'm confused.
Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 2540
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:01 pm
Points: 2,354

Hey Cardinal, thanks for asking. One thing to look out for in Method-AP questions, and also in Main Point questions, is complex arguments with multiple conclusions. Also, be aware that the main conclusion never needs to be at the end of the stimulus, and in those question types they often like to play "hide the ball" on us and put the main conclusion elsewhere, maybe at the very beginning. It's not uncommon to see an intermediate conclusion at the end of the stimulus, because the authors know that many of us will mistakenly assume that's the main conclusion.

"After all" is almost always a premise indicator, and never a conclusion indicator. Why? Because it means "here's why" or "this explains it", and those are premise-y ideas, not conclusion indicators.

Now, think of the relationship between what you thought was the conclusion and the claim they asked us about. Ignore the rest of the argument for this part. Here is where we figure out which claim is supporting the other, and I will be paraphrasing to keep it simple.

Does "the risk is going to get worse" support "there's going to be a lot of junk flying around"? Or, does "there's going to be a lot of junk flying around" support "the risk is going to get worse"? I think it's pretty clearly the latter, not the former, and that proves that "lots of junk flying around" cannot be the main conclusion. Main conclusions are selfish - they get all the support but give none in return. In this case, "the risk is going to get worse" supports nothing, but gets plenty of support. That's how you know it's the main conclusion - it's selfish!

I hope that helped. Beware of those complex arguments with conclusions in the beginning or middle and, sometimes, with additional conclusions thrown into the mix. Keep up the hard work!
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam
Sparklingfairy96
LSAT Novice
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:05 pm
Points: 1

Can I please have some clarification on why D is the answer but not C?
Malila Robinson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:41 am
Points: 273

Hi Sparklingfairy96,
Answer C sounds like it is describing a sub-conclusion(secondary conclusion/other conclusion/etc.). But the sentence they are asking about is the main conclusion, which means it is not supporting any of the other sentences, instead it is being supported by the other sentences. That leads to Answer D being the correct choice.
Hope that helps!
-Malila
LSAT2018
LSAT Master
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:11 am
Points: 274

I was able to choose Answer (D) for this question but would like to ask about the stimulus itself. The statements following the conclusion are a chain of events from the collision to fragments, to more fragments. I was wondering if, because this is a chain, the statements are two separate premises, or a premise followed by a subsidiary conclusion (last statement)?