#4 - Must Be True, Purpose, Author’s Perspective

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=13775)

The correct answer choice is (A)

The answer to this Purpose question should be broad in scope, and is prephrased in the VIEWSTAMP analysis in the passage discussion.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. The solution is clearly innovative, because Whatley’s approach to small farming runs counter to the dominant trends in agriculture (lines 7-8). The problem is described as “growing” in line 4, so to call it “serious” would not be an exaggeration.

Answer choice (B): The author never isolated the strengths and weaknesses of any contemporary trends.

Answer choice (C): Even though Whatley may well be critical of the prevailing trends in agriculture and its “sprawling corporate farms” (lines 53-54), such criticism is subtly insinuated and not the main purpose of the passage.

Answer choice (D): There is no debate of the “pros-and-cons” regarding Whatley’s approach to small farming: the author is never critical of his recommendations, making this answer choice relatively easy to eliminate.

Answer choice (E): This is an attractive answer choice, because Whatley clearly believes that adhering to his plan will have an impact on agriculture (lines 52-55). However, there is no indication that the author would agree with this prediction. Remember: the purpose of the passage is to describe Whatley’s ideas, not analyze their impact.

[Barcelona10]

I had trouble narrowing the answer down for this one, which is problematic because it doesn't seem like it would be a harder one for most people.

I was between E, D, and A, and went with one of the wrong answers. I was wondering if someone could help me understand why A is correct.

Here is why I did not pick A: 1.) A "serious" problem is never quite mentioned--it is true that big corporations are leading smaller firms to go insolvent, and this is a problem--but a serious one? (We know how literal LSAT likes us to be so often after all.) 2.) The approach is called "comprehensive" (line 7), but where does it say that this a "innovative" approach? I did not see it.

I chose E, because I thought it was analyzing the impact of a new idea, Whatley's idea, on an industry based on particular traditions--that is, the seller distributing to consumers, as opposed to pick your own farming. (Line 44 references that a traditional view exists).

I would have chosen D next, but I did not see any disadvantages explicitly laid out--though the author did imply potential disadvantages with the caution given in the 4th paragraph. So, I guess I would eliminate D for disadvantage. Is this right?

How would you eliminate D,E, and make the case for A?

Thank you very much!

[David Boyle]

I had trouble narrowing the answer down for this one, which is problematic because it doesn't seem like it would be a harder one for most people.

I was between E, D, and A, and went with one of the wrong answers. I was wondering if someone could help me understand why A is correct.

Here is why I did not pick A: 1.) A "serious" problem is never quite mentioned--it is true that big corporations are leading smaller firms to go insolvent, and this is a problem--but a serious one? (We know how literal LSAT likes us to be so often after all.) 2.) The approach is called "comprehensive" (line 7), but where does it say that this a "innovative" approach? I did not see it.

I chose E, because I thought it was analyzing the impact of a new idea, Whatley's idea, on an industry based on particular traditions--that is, the seller distributing to consumers, as opposed to pick your own farming. (Line 44 references that a traditional view exists).

I would have chosen D next, but I did not see any disadvantages explicitly laid out--though the author did imply potential disadvantages with the caution given in the 4th paragraph. So, I guess I would eliminate D for disadvantage. Is this right?

How would you eliminate D,E, and make the case for A?

Thank you very much!

Hello Barcelona10,

For A, it seems reasonable to call multiple bankruptcies a serious problem. Also, given language like "Whatley reverses the traditional view of hard-surfaced (45) roads as farm-to-market roads", it seems fair to call his ideas innovative.
For E: has Whatley's approach actually been used yet? If not, how could it impact the industry?
For D, that's right, I don't see a lot of (or any?) disadvantages.

Hope this helps,
David

[snowy]

“Tradition-driven” in E was a red flag for me. Is that fair?

(I got this question right but just wanted to check whether that red flag is fair!)

[Erik Shum]

Hi Snowy,

"Tradition-driven" was a red flag for me as well. However, I eliminated answer choice (E) at "analyzing the impact".

[chrisfromc123]

I narrowed it down to A and D. Went with D as I did made the mistake of considering the plight of small farms to be inconsequential (more of a natural market evolution). In any case, I can see now how the problem could be considered serious and why A is a better choice.

However, for answer D, is it not true that the author mentions how Whatley cautions about the limited scope of his plan (at the top of the final paragraph). In your view would this constitute a disadvantage? I feel that with many business decisions a disadvantage can be found in the limited ability of a program to be implemented. Thanks.

[Poonam Agrawal]

Hi Chris!

With author's purpose questions, you always have to remember who the author of the passage is. It is true that Whatley believes his plan has a limitation - he does say location is very important for the plan to work. However, is this a reflection of the author demonstrating a disadvantage? No - this is just the author giving an objective statement about something that Whatley has cautioned against.

If it were the author presenting this as a disadvantage, the language would have been something along the lines of, Whatley's plan is not without its drawbacks. See how that is a direct statement from the author that is more of a subjective opinion? This is not how it is presented in the passage, however. The author's tone is overall neutral as far as the plan's recommendations go. Hope this helps!