Round 5: Practice mapping conclusions in answers

Let’s do this! In this round we’ll keep practicing questions where the answers are conclusions.

There were two flavors of these in the last round: the “main point” question where you match the answer to a conclusion stated in the passage, and the “most supported” question where you fill in an unstated conclusion. Let’s do one more of each of those, and then for a little bonus FUN! we’ll also try a third question type with conclusions in the answers that’s maybe a bit harder.

Let’s get PrepTest 140 pulled up wherever you access official LSAT’s, and open Section 1. This test is included with a free LawHub account if you don’t already have a subscription.

🔎 Can I give you a mini challenge before we go over questions? How do you feel about clicking through Section 1 and finding the other “main point” and “most supported” question in this section? (We already did questions 7 and 8, so find the other two). For extra credit, can you find our third question? It’s the one whose prompt says the answer isn’t just supported, it’s actually 100% proven based on the passage.

When you’re ready to go, scroll on down and let’s score some points.

Preptest 140, section 1, question 5
Essayist: If Earth’s population…

PROMPT: How will the right answer relate to the argument?

Alright, here’s the “main point” question. We should all be feeling confident that the prompt tells us that the right answer will be the closest match to the statement we’re about to tag as the conclusion of the argument.

PASSAGE: Tag the conclusion/s and support

Essayist: [BACKGROUND]. [BACKGROUND: Some people have claimed…, since…]. [CONLCUSION]: [SUPPORT].

This passage actually adds support for the side of the argument the author ends up disagreeing with, which is pretty uncommon. That’s what the “since…” statement is doing. But if you recognized the author’s disagreement, then you knew that statement is the conclusion: “This [colonizing other planets] would, however, be a temporary solution at best.”

ANSWERS: Carefully map the wording of the answers to the passage

(A) …the population density of Earth’s surface will be…

This is just a mathy fact about population density, it’s doesn’t even talk about colonizing other planets. And it doesn’t say anything that sounds even close to “temporary solution”.

(B) …the problem of overpopulation of Earth will probably persist.

No colonizing other planets, and no temporary solution. Moving on.

(C) If Earth’s population continues…

This matches the support at the end of the passage. Sucker bet! Don’t forget order doesn’t matter. Going at the end doesn’t make it a conclusion.

(D) …even if temporary solutions, such as colonizing other planets…

Ohh careful. This has the wording we want in it, but don’t miss that this is now taking the “temporary solution” thing as a given to make another point the author didn’t get into. They only said “if” that growth continues, not that it’s probable.

(E) Learning how to colonize other planets would, at best, be a temporary solution…

Boom! If you proactively tag the statements in the passage while you’re reading or right after, there’s basically no work to do here. This maps perfectly to the author’s conclusion.

(E) is the correct answer.

Let’s move on to the questions that ask for unstated conclusions and give ourselves a little more of a challenge.

Preptest 140, section 1, question 15
Greatly exceeding the recommended…

PROMPT: How will the right answer relate to the argument?

This prompt adds the word “strongly” for some reason, but the right answer relates to the argument the same way as when it’s not there. It will be a conclusion that gets supported by the passage. You’ll often see more than one answer that gets some support, so make sure you’re clear on exactly what the prompt is asking. Pick the one that gets the “most” support. That’s not a trivial detail.

PASSAGE: Tag the conclusion/s and support

[Probably BACKGROUND but could be support]. For [probably SUPPORT but could go either way]. But [SUPPORT for sure].

Tagging support and background can be a little funny on some on these questions asking for unstated conclusions (what you might hear test prep companies call “inference” or “implication” questions). Since there’s no conclusion stated, you may not be able to tell whether a line in the passage is support or background until you see the answer choices.

My tags above are really driven by the word “But…” That’s an argument word for sure, so that statement is definitely going to function as support for the right answer. That’s also why I anticipate the sentence before being used as support, even though that’s not for sure. The first sentence is further from “But” so I anticipate that will just be background. It’s reeeally rare that the answer would depend on three separate pieces of support.

ANSWERS: Carefully map the wording of the answers to the passage

(A) …are aware of the recommended daily intake…

There’s nothing stated about anyone’s awareness of recommended daily intakes. We were told “people overestimate” serving sizes, but that doesn’t support few people being aware of the recommended daily intake.

(B) Some people who consume vitamin-fortified foods exceed the recommended daily intake…

You love a really weak qualifier like “some”, since valid conclusions can’t use stronger wording than the rest of the argument. And of course, it’s exactly the right group of people, doing exactly what is described in the passage. All the wording maps beautifully.

(C) Some people mistakenly believe it is healthy…

Just because people overestimate serving sizes, that doesn’t support ANY statement about what they believe is healthy. This wording doesn’t map at all.

(D) Most people…should not take any vitamin supplements.

No way we have support for any conclusion about “most” people. No way we have support for whether they should or “should not” take supplements. And even if you thought there was, no way the passage supports a recommendation against “any” supplements at all.

(E) Manufacturers are unaware…

Stop. No. The only thing we know about “manufacturers” based on the passage is they set what a serving size is. There’s no support that they are “unaware” of anything.

(B) is the correct answer.

Did you find the third one I want to go over? It’s the last one in this section that has conclusions in the answers. Ready? Let’s bag us one more point!

Preptest 140, section 1, question 17
If a motor is sound-insulated…

PROMPT: How will the right answer relate to the argument?

The prompt says the right answer “must be true” based on the passage. That definitely still means the answer is a conclusion supported by the passage, but it’s gotta meet a higher standard this time. We have to be able to say that the right answer is 100% proven by the support in the passage.

PASSAGE: Tag the conclusion/s and support

[Could be BACKGROUND or SUPPORT: If-then rule #1]. [Also could be BACKGROUND or SUPPORT: If-then rule #2]. [SUPPORT].

So the first two sentences are if-then rules. Rules are an easy way for the people writing the test to manufacture something that “must be true”, so expect to see them in at least half of the passages with prompts like this one.

I’ll get into the reasoning in a sec, but the pattern recognition is actually more important for your score, so check this out: a conclusion rarely needs three pieces of support, so it’s likely that one of the if-then rules ends up just being background. But the last sentence is a clear factual statement, so that’s very likely to be used as support/evidence for the right answer. I’m keying in on that bit.

What I need you to recognize is how the info in the last sentence triggers one of the conditions in the if-then rules. It’s like this: if “None of the motors manufactured by EM Industries are quiet enough to use in home appliances,” then we also know that none of EM’s motors are sound-insulated. Why? Because, as if-then rule #1 told us, if they were sound-insulated, then they would also be quiet enough for home appliances.

If they’re not quiet enough for home appliances, they must not be sound-insulated either. If you’re with me, now we can check if there’s an answer that says that.

ANSWERS: Carefully map the wording of the answers to the passage

(B) None of motors manufactured by EM Industries are sound-insulated.

Boom! Need I say more?

I would realistically hope that’s how this one would go for you. But if not, never fear! Let’s carefully map the wording in the remaining answers and prove to ourselves that none of them “must be true”.

(A) If a motor can be used in institutional settings,…

Stop. We have no info about what happens “if” a motor can be used in institutional settings. That was only a result of one of the if-then rules, so we can’t be sure of any new if-then rules that start with that.

(C) At least some of the motors…

Generally we like conclusions that are worded weakly like this. But in this case “some” doesn’t map to any similar wording in the passage. The if-then rules apply all the time, and the last sentence only said “none”.

(D) If a motor is quiet enough…

This is tricky since all the wording maps. What you need to recognize is that this is swapping the “if” and “then” parts of the first rule. But “if” and “then” aren’t interchangeable. That’s mixing up sufficient and necessary conditions, which will always be wrong.

(E) None of the motors…can be used in institutional settings.

Same, same but different from (D). The rule in the passage says if it’s quiet enough, then it can be used… So if it’s not quiet enough, then it can’t be used, right? Wrong. Maybe there’s some other way that a motor could qualify to be used in institutional settings, even if it’s not quiet enough for home appliances.

They expect you to recognize that this is just taking if-then rule #2 from the passage and dropping a NOT in front of each part. That’s the other way the LSAT mixes up sufficient and necessary conditions, which is still always wrong.

(B) is the correct answer.

If the if-then rules are really messing with you, then I recommend going over the “Logic toolbox” in LawHub (see what I did there?😁). This stuff just doesn’t come up on many questions so please don’t waste your youth studying conditional logic for hours and hours. But if you weren’t picking up what I was putting down on that last question, it’ll be worth brushing up.

The big takeaway: Always tag the support and conclusion in the passage while you’re reading or right after, so you’ll know what to map the answers to.

You know that at the end of the day, carefully mapping the wording of the answers is how we score all the points. But clearly, working through the list of answers is way easier when you know what you want to be checking those answers against. When the answers are conclusions, you’ll map to the conclusion in the passage if it’s stated, or to support if it’s not.

Common patterns we saw in this round:

• must vs. most: Make sure you are always crystal clear on whether the prompt says the right answer “must be” something or says it “most” or “best” does a thing. In this round we saw one prompt asking for a conclusion that gets the “most” support and one asking for a conclusion that “must” be.
• There are two ways LSAT authors mix up sufficient and necessary conditions: they can get the order backwards, or flip them negative/positive. Remember of course you’ll only see these patterns when the passage uses if-then rules.

The plan will work if you do.