to the top

#9 - Since multinational grain companies operate so as to

helloworld
LSAT Novice
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2019 9:41 pm
Points: 1

[admin note: full text of LSAT question removed from original post due to LSAC copyright regulations]

The answer is E. I don't see a better alternative, but I'm not fully convinced E is a fully correct answer either.

My thinking is that the argument only states that the food companies can't be relied upon to initiate economic changes that lead to reform. The support for the argument is the profit motive, and doesn't exclude being able to rely on the companies for reform of the food-distribution system apart from economic changes.
George George
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:42 am
Points: 48

@helloworld

Good Q! I think the key to understanding (E) and not feeling uncomfortable by the slight twist in language is to notice that the original stimulus links "economic change" with "reform[ing] the world's food-distribution system" by saying that the grain companies "cannot be relied on to initiate economic changes that would reform the world's food-distribution system."

Now, you might be tempted to think that the argument didn't rule out non-economic reforms, and so the conclusion shouldn't be that specific. (You're right that the author's argument is flawed in that way - and points to you for noticing that discrepancy!) However, Main Point Qs don't ask you for the flaw in the argument. They just ask you what the author's main conclusion is. So, even if the argument is flawed (as most LSAT arguments are), it won't change the answer to this Q-type. The answer will still be a restatement of the conclusion in the author's argument. (Personally, I often stop reading an LR stimulus on a Main Point Q after I've found the author's opinion. Reading the premises is just distracting, and makes me overthink the Q.)