Q24 - A survey of a city's concertgoers

[aliciaq]

Hi, could someone explain why D would help explain the apparent conflict?

[iryankees13]

Hi, could someone explain why D would help explain the apparent conflict?

First the conflict is that many people are dissatisfied with the current concert hall and expressed a desire for wider seats and better acoustics. They were told that the concert hall could not be modified to fit these requirements but a new one could be built. However most opposed the idea of tearing it down and building a new concert hall with the features they wanted.

Ok so my prephrase going in would be a few things:
1. What if the process of tearing down the hall and building another is immensely expensive and would cause an increase in taxes, which may outweigh the potential benefit of a new hall.
2. What if the most of the people who attend also attended as children and the building had great sentimental value to them.

Unfortunately none of these popped up but I thought it may be helpful to see some initial thoughts going into the question.

The correct answer D helps to explain the conflict because the reason no one wants the hall to be torn down is that there is ALREADY a well-publicized plan for building one. In addition, the current concert hall could be converted into an auditorium so there would be no need for its demolition because it can still be of use for other purposes. Even further the people can still get there new concert with all the features they want.
Hope that helps

[aliciaq]

Thank you! I didn't think of how the "already" would explained this. It makes a lot more sense now.

[maryadkins]

Great explanation, thank you!

(A) doesn't work because why would this affect their response negatively? They'd tell the truth, presumably, no matter what.

(B) is irrelevant because the paradox is about the concertgoers.

(C) So what? The discrepancy is in why these people want two seemingly contradictory things.

(E) Again, so what?

[kjsmit02]

Great explanation, thank you!

(A) doesn't work because why would this affect their response negatively? They'd tell the truth, presumably, no matter what.

(B) is irrelevant because the paradox is about the concertgoers.

(C) So what? The discrepancy is in why these people want two seemingly contradictory things.

(E) Again, so what?

I had originally picked (D), but upon blind review, changed it to (B). Now I'm confused of how either of these can be right.

(D) gives at first what seems like solid reasoning, but even though a new concert hall is going to be built, how do we know that this new one will have any of the changes that the concert goers seek? Are these changes [wider seats & + acoustics] assumed to be in the new concert hall in answer choice (D), based on their rejection of the "tearing down" idea that would certainly grant them their desired changes?

(B) is flat out wrong (the population around the concert hall and their opinions has no guarantee of being reflected in the concert goers survey), but after seeing my issue with (D) it seemed like it could be more plausible.

In all, I guess (D) would still be most likely, but does my reasoning hold any strength to be so critical of the correct answer choice? Are there any ways to look at the problem better so that I can more quickly eliminate these qualms?

[krisk743]

I'm sorry but this is just a flat out STUPID question. How in the hell does D EXPLAIN a conflict....this answer choice RESOLVES the question it does nothing to explain the conflict.

This LR section is seriously the most difficult i've ever seen. These answer choices would not for even a second cross my mind and i've done tests 30-80, multiple times.

[andrewgong01]

I'm sorry but this is just a flat out STUPID question. How in the hell does D EXPLAIN a conflict....this answer choice RESOLVES the question it does nothing to explain the conflict.

This LR section is seriously the most difficult i've ever seen. These answer choices would not for even a second cross my mind and i've done tests 30-80, multiple times.

I agree, overall Prep 73 (especially RC) seemed way harder than other Prep Tests...


I think it explains it in this way after carefully re-reading the answer choice again and stimulus. The stimulus said something along the lines of they oppose tearing down the current building. My pre-phase was maybe there are other factors for keeping the building that outweighs the benefits of better seats/sound system (e.g. it is a high yielding tourist destination because it is historical )

Answer Choice "D" interjects with an alternative reason: People do not want it teared down because it will be replaced with a public auditotirum in the SAME building and then they will get a new concert hall nearby. I guess the assumption being is that people want the public auditorium too AND the new concert hall.

I think "B" is a weak wrong answer because "B" sheds light at another factor as to why we don't want to tear down the building: People nearby just don't want it torn down for whatever reason (e.g. maybe it is construction noise, sentiment, asethetic reasons). I know that the survey respondents are concert goers who may not be residents nearby BUT that does not mean survey respondents do not 100% ignore other people's preferences and concerns? Maybe when answering it they know that if the building is torn down it is going to anger the people nearby with all the construction noises etc. This is an assumption but it "D" had an assumption too and it would not be too extreme to claim that citizens give no care whatsoever to other people's well being (e.g. people protest on behalf of other people being discriminated against , people without kids still pay property taxes that are funding public schools etc)

I understand the previous posts ruled out "B" because it is irrevleant since "B" is not about concert goers but concert goers may still care about other people's well being as I have indicated above.


Is there something I am missing here that allows "B" to be ruled out more easily?

[reginaphalange]

I understand the previous posts ruled out "B" because it is irrevleant since "B" is not about concert goers but concert goers may still care about other people's well being as I have indicated above.

Is there something I am missing here that allows "B" to be ruled out more easily?

I agree with andrewgong01 that both (D) and (B) give us plausible reasons why concertgoers may not want the current hall torn down. The only advantage of (D) is that it tells us that auditorium plan is 'well-publicized.'
'Well-publicized' makes it more likely that concertgoers know about this plan, whereas there's no indication in (B) that concertgoers know residents don't want the hall torn down. If it weren't for that, there's no good reason to believe concertgoers care more about an auditorium than about how residents feel.

[andrewgong01]

I just re-did this LR set 2 months later and I am still not quite seeing "D" fully but is it because D is implying that there is something about the current concert hall that people like and value too that the survey did not capture (e.g. the current concert hall has much cheaper parking or the current concert hall has history in it). It still seems hard to rule out "B" but I guess "B" requires the assumption that the current concert goers know and care about the people who live nearby the hall?

[ohthatpatrick]

We're just trying to solve this mystery:

GIVEN THAT
most of the city's concertgoers are dissastified with the local concert hall
WHY IS IT THAT
they oppose a plan of tearing down the existing structure and replacing it with a better concert hall?

(D) says
it's because they would RATHER follow the plan of converting the existing hall into an auditorium and building a new (presumably better) concert hall nearby.

The public favors this plan because it gets them TWO public benefits vs. ONE

The plan they reject: one public benefit .... a new and improved concert hall.

The plan they prefer: two public benefits ... a new and improved concert hall (still in the same area) AND a new public auditorium.

(and, yes, you were right on about why we'd get rid of B)

[LSATN308]

I see that why A is wrong here, just because they were told about the sponsorship, we do not know whether they were influenced by that or not, so there's still a gap.

For me, I had a different logic for E - I thought maybe currently it is local musicians who play music which promotes local culture and music but if they built a new one it will bring popular musicians who might not be the prefered musician that the local concertgoers want, but I guess there's too much gap here as well?

For D - Just because it was "well-publicized", how do we know for sure that the concertgoers knew about this plan and actually supports the idea? So there's also a GAP.

so for me this question is wrong cause all of A,D, E have gaps!

Can someone explain why my logic for E won't work?

[JeremyK460]

people think X is shitty
X can't be made any better as it is
to make X better, they can tear it down
people don't want X to be torn down

people don't believe that tearing X down is necessary for a better X

why is tearing down the shitty concert hall not necessary? because a better concert hall is being built nearby and they can repurpose the shitty one

that's what (d) says

all the other answer choices are contextually vague/ambiguous
they seem plausibly connected, but they aren't