Q10 - Council member P: Alarmists are

[acc0520]

"disagree" problem always makes me nervous...can u explain why the answer is (E)?

[chike_eze]

One of the tougher ones I've seen in a while. I wish I didn't know the answer was E before attempting it.

P: Alarmists exaggerates an instance of pollution as a fault of society. They should realize that people are not likely to pollute.

Q: That there isn't widespread pollution is based on a principle that I do not agree with. Contrary to your opinion, it is easier for people to pollute than not pollute.

P says "people do not have a tendency to pollute". And Q says it is "unlikely that one instance explains all the pollution" and "it is easier for people to pollute".

Disagreement: P believes people do not have a tendency to pollute, and Q does not believe this to be true.

-> Close match to (E)

[gmatalongthewatchtower]

LSAT Team,
Can you please let me know what's problem with B)? I think that Q agrees with "path of least resistance." However, P does say that people *may* be disinclined to pollute. To me, B and D sound similar. Isn't it?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Great question!

This one is almost easier to work answer choice by answer choice, rather than to spend a lot of time upfront, trying to anticipate the disagreement.

Let's start with the correct answer choice (E):

Lets ask ourselves, "would either of these folks agree with this answer choice?" If the answer is "yes", then we need the other council member to disagree with the claim. Council member Q would definitely agree with the claim that people are inclined to pollute as people are inclined to take the path of least resistance. Council member P, however, would disagree with the claim as he says that people have a disposition not to pollute.

Now let's turn the incorrect answer choices:

(A) is not addressed by either council member. What is and what is not a problem does not come into play.
(B) is not addressed by council member P, though council member Q would agree here.
(C) is not something either would really disagree with. It seems that they both concede that humans are at least partially responsible for pollution that does occur. The issue is more about the degree of pollution.
(D) is not discussed in the argument. No one really discusses whether people can change their behavior, but rather what is their behavior and to what extent has that behavior impacted our environment.

Hope that helps, but let me know if you have further questions here!

[deedubbew]

I find the wording of P very hard to understand. I didn't get that the point was being made that people are not inclined to pollute; even if P concedes that an instance is not a major charter fault of society. My understanding is that P was simply contrasting people who's behavior had an impact against those who have a disposition not to pollute. Not that generally people have a disposition not to pollute. Is P saying that people have a disposition not to pollute in the last sentence alone?

[eomersheng]

I think what P is saying is that alarmists are people who fuss about pollution. These alarmists can not distinguish A and B. A is the pollution and human activities that cause the pollution. B is people's innate tendency not to pollute. An inference of P's statement would be alarmists fail to realize that people might indeed pollute without an intent to pollute. They did it but they did not want to do it.

That makes the contrast with Q's statement more obvious. Q is saying people actually tend to / want to pollute because it is easy. That will lead us to choice E pretty straightforwardly.

[hnadgauda]

P: alarmists think an incident of pollution and the behavior that caused the incident is the same as the disposition of people.
Q: alarmists are justified in thinking this!

What are they saying? P is saying these alarmists are ridiculous: they need to stop exaggerating from single instances of pollution. This implies that P is saying alarmists are overreacting from instances of pollution. Q is saying the alarmists' reasoning makes sense!

A: They both agree pollution is a problem.
B: Q says this and P doesn't counter it.
C: people are responsible...tempting BUT P concedes that people can be responsible for pollution. They both agree with this.
D: also tempting but P is saying people don't have polluting behavior engrained in them and it can be changed. It's saying their polluting behavior is arbitrary and isn't their disposition! No word from P on if behavior can be changed.
E: yes, they disagree about this. P is saying people aren't inclined to pollute. Just because they do it sometimes, doesn't mean it's their disposition. Q says the opposite.