Q25 - Editorial: the town would not

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Determine the Function (the contention that ___ plays which role)

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: Current system of voluntary trash sorting is better than a system of forced sorting.
Evidence: Even though we'd spend less if everyone sorted their own trash, many people would still resentfully refuse to do so and the money we'd save wouldn't be worth the uptick in resetment.

Answer Anticipation:
They're asking us essentially about a COUNTERPOINT, or a CONCESSION, as shown in my appendage of an "even though". The fact that the town would save money if everyone sorted their own trash is a reason to prefer the nonvoluntary system.

Correct Answer:
B

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) No, the author presents this idea, acknowledging its truth.

(B) Correct! This fact "supports an alternative practice" = nonvoluntary system. The editorial defends the practice of "voluntary system" as preferable.

(C) The editorial is not trying to refute or falsify this claim. It's saying "true, but still …"

(D) Not a premise. It doesn't support "voluntary", it supports "nonvoluntary".

(E) Definitely not the conclusion.

Takeaway/Pattern: The fact that the claim they ask us about is followed by "but/yet/however" will indicate it's some form of counterpoint. It's NOT part of the author's argument, so it's not going to be a premise or conclusion. Correct LSAT answers almost never deal with saying that a fact is untrue or false. We're playing a game where we accpet certain ideas, BUT STILL find a way to argue in the opposite direction. So "trying to show is false" and "attempting to refute" are harsh. We could only accept that wording if an author said something explicit like "This cannot be true. This claim is rubbish." etc.

#officialexplanation

[irenaj]

I narrow down to B and D, then choose D as I find its expression is safe and would not be wrong and B's expression is somehow weird.

Could anyone please explain why D incorrect and how the first sentence lends support to the conclusion? I can somehow sense it but B is so not appealing...

Thanks a lot!

[ohthatpatrick]

When we do these Determine the Function questions, the most important thing to figure out first is "what's the main conclusion?"

You didn't mention what you thought the conclusion was, so take a second to look back at the argument and try to make that determination.

....

The main conclusion here, the suggestion the author is endorsing, is "The current voluntary system is to be preferred".

Why? What's his premise?

"Because it costs about the same as the nonvoluntary system but doesn't create as much resentment"

The keyword that helps show me the conclusion and the premise is the word "because". Any idea that comes after "because" or "since" is a premise. Whatever that idea is supposed to be supporting is a conclusion.

Note, this comes in two interchangeable forms:
"Because it costs about the same and causes less resentment, the voluntary system is to be preferred"
"The voluntary system is to be preferred, because it costs about the same and causes less resentment"

Anyhoo, knowing confidently that our conclusion is
"The voluntary system is preferred", let's ask ourselves if the first sentence is a premise, i.e., does the 1st sentence give us a reason to believe we should prefer the voluntary system?:

The town wouldn't need to spend as much money removing trash if everyone sorted their own garbage.
therefore
The voluntary system is preferred .... ???

Does this 1st idea support the conclusion? It doesn't sound like it to me.

If the town would save money by having everyone sort their own garbage, shouldn't we require everyone to sort their own garbage?

That's the "nonvoluntary system" the argument refers to.

The author is implictly arguing against requiring everyone to sort their own garbage.

The author acknowledges that a benefit of that idea is that it would incite some people to sort their garbage, but the author thinks that a bigger detriment to that idea is that many people would refuse to comply and resent it. (note the common form: WHILE I concede to my opponent X, I still think that Y is more important.)

Hence, the author concludes that we should stick with the voluntary system.

In the language of (B), "the editorial defends the practice of the voluntary system as preferable". Meanwhile, the 1st sentence, which really supports using the nonvoluntary system is described as "a fact that lends some support to an alternative".

You mentioned that you preferred (D) because it was expressed clearly and felt more safe. You should realize that the test writers know that --- that's what helps make this an appealing trap answer on a tough question. The fact that (B) is worded in a deliberately complicated fashion doesn't guarantee it's the correct answer, but you should realize that the test writers often use confusing phrasing in the correct answer (to hard questions) in order to make them less appealing to the masses.

Also, you should realize that in Main Conclusion and Determine the Function questions, the argument often refers either explicitly or implicitly to an opposing position. (You'll see linguistic cues such as "but/yet/however" to indicate the author disagreeing with some position. And you'll see "despite/while/although" when the author is saying "Although I grant my opponent this point, THIS is what I think is more important").

Be prepared and willing to read the argument multiple times in order to be sure you've differentiated the author's position and his premise vs. some opposing position and its premise.

I hope this helps. Let me know if you have further questions.

[irenaj]

Very clear, ohthatpatrick! I read your analysis then reviewed the stimulus again and found the sentence in D indeed not necessarily for the conclusion, it is more like a background information/introduction of the debate of preferring voluntary or order.

Thanks so much!

[robin]

I always thought the short passage primarily consists of just 2 parts- a premise and a conclusion, with some inherent assumption.

And that made me choose D as the answer.

With this question, I learnt that there is also "background information" which doesnt come under the broad definition of premise.

If I had known this, would have marked B right away.

Experts, am I correct here?

Thanks.

[shirando21]

When we do these Determine the Function questions, the most important thing to figure out first is "what's the main conclusion?"

You didn't mention what you thought the conclusion was, so take a second to look back at the argument and try to make that determination.

....

The main conclusion here, the suggestion the author is endorsing, is "The current voluntary system is to be preferred".

Why? What's his premise?

"Because it costs about the same as the nonvoluntary system but doesn't create as much resentment"

The keyword that helps show me the conclusion and the premise is the word "because". Any idea that comes after "because" or "since" is a premise. Whatever that idea is supposed to be supporting is a conclusion.

Note, this comes in two interchangeable forms:
"Because it costs about the same and causes less resentment, the voluntary system is to be preferred"
"The voluntary system is to be preferred, because it costs about the same and causes less resentment"

Anyhoo, knowing confidently that our conclusion is
"The voluntary system is preferred", let's ask ourselves if the first sentence is a premise, i.e., does the 1st sentence give us a reason to believe we should prefer the voluntary system?:

The town wouldn't need to spend as much money removing trash if everyone sorted their own garbage.
therefore
The voluntary system is preferred .... ???

Does this 1st idea support the conclusion? It doesn't sound like it to me.

If the town would save money by having everyone sort their own garbage, shouldn't we require everyone to sort their own garbage?

That's the "nonvoluntary system" the argument refers to.

The author is implictly arguing against requiring everyone to sort their own garbage.

The author acknowledges that a benefit of that idea is that it would incite some people to sort their garbage, but the author thinks that a bigger detriment to that idea is that many people would refuse to comply and resent it. (note the common form: WHILE I concede to my opponent X, I still think that Y is more important.)

Hence, the author concludes that we should stick with the voluntary system.

In the language of (B), "the editorial defends the practice of the voluntary system as preferable". Meanwhile, the 1st sentence, which really supports using the nonvoluntary system is described as "a fact that lends some support to an alternative".

You mentioned that you preferred (D) because it was expressed clearly and felt more safe. You should realize that the test writers know that --- that's what helps make this an appealing trap answer on a tough question. The fact that (B) is worded in a deliberately complicated fashion doesn't guarantee it's the correct answer, but you should realize that the test writers often use confusing phrasing in the correct answer (to hard questions) in order to make them less appealing to the masses.

Also, you should realize that in Main Conclusion and Determine the Function questions, the argument often refers either explicitly or implicitly to an opposing position. (You'll see linguistic cues such as "but/yet/however" to indicate the author disagreeing with some position. And you'll see "despite/while/although" when the author is saying "Although I grant my opponent this point, THIS is what I think is more important").

Be prepared and willing to read the argument multiple times in order to be sure you've differentiated the author's position and his premise vs. some opposing position and its premise.

I hope this helps. Let me know if you have further questions.

This analysis is very thorough and helpful. thanks a lot.

[disguise_sky]

So the first sentence is actually evidence supporting the alternative practice and only the evidence after "because" is used to support the author's conclusion? Is my understanding right?
I have a little problem here: the 1st sentence says that the alternative practice requires less spending while the "because" sentence says that the nonvoluntary one (namely the alternative) costs as much as the voluntary one. So is the author denying the truth of the piece of evidence concerning tha cost in the 1st sentence? I am rather confused about the relative cost of these two systems when I did this question.
Thanks in advance for your help!

[danielleyork]

I'm still having trouble when it comes to D. Hindsight is 20/20. I see why B is better, but I'm still concerned I'd choose D if put in a similar situation. Here is my dilemma:

The town would not need to spend as much as It does on removing trash if ALL town residents sorted their garbage

if you take the above statement as a premise, then negate it to get:
if NOT all town residents sort garbage, then town will need to spend as much as it does now to remove trash.

Thus, we rely on this premise to reach the conclusion that we should keep the current system.

using the "because it costs as much as a nonvoluntary system" as a second premise.