Q3

[nnn2108]

These "logically complete the last paragraph" questions always trip me up.

I don't understand what information we are supposed to find the correct answer.

I chose B for this question, and I think that it is wrong because it says on lines 3-6 that "foresters and ecologists are increasingly aware that too much firefighting can be worse than none at all", in addition to the fact that no where in the text did the author mention that the foresters would be against the new proposals.

A is wrong because the text never discusses the effects of wildfires on houses

C is correct because the selective harvesting and the intentional lighting of controlled burns, take time to plan and roll out. This is supported by line 54, where the author says "Once fuels are reduced". Meaning that it could take time to get to a place where we don't have to worry about the threat of big fires.

D is wrong because the author does not talk about the financial implications of the proposals in the passage

E is wrong because again the author does not talk about financial implications. It would come out of no where and be unsubstantiated.

Is my understanding of these answers correct?

[rinagoldfield]

Hi nnn2108

The “complete the last paragraph” questions are indeed hard! Remember that you’re looking for a new sentence that will conclude not only the last paragraph, but also the whole passage. The key, therefore, is to find a sentence that 1. connects to the information contained in the last paragraph, and 2. connects to the theme of the passage as a whole.

Often, the correct answer will relate to the last and to earlier paragraphs. The LSAT likes it when passages loop full-circle.

With that in mind, let’s refresh what the paragraphs are all about:

-P1 says: too much firefighting is dangerous
-P2 says: too much firefighting leads to occasional but devastating fires
-P3 says: fuel management is a good strategy for controlling burns

Your explanations of the wrong answer choices are fantastic.

Homes makes (A) out of scope.
The forestry community and the beliefs of foresters makes (B) out of scope.
Choice (D) introduces a totally new consideration… which wouldn’t make sense as a sentence to conclude the passage.
Choice (E) discusses financial resources, which is, again, a new consideration.

Choice (C) connects, as we hoped, to the end and the beginning of the passage. It links the fuel management strategy to a concern outlined in paragraph two (devastating fires). We have the full-circle loop that the LSAT loves.

Remember on these questions: link back, way back!

Hope that helps.

[JorieB701]

These questions don't seem to come up incredibly often, unless I've just blacked them out, . But with this one, it almost seems like we can just treat it as a
"the author would most likely agree" question. Is that essentially what we're doing here? The other options here, A,B,D,E, all seem to be adding something that I have no reason to believe the author would say.. they're all kind of adding an extra premise that isn't supported by the passage. So I chose C merely because it was a safe inference to make in regards to what's been provided. Is this what we're supposed to be doing here? Can we just essentially treat these as a most strongly supported question?

[ohthatpatrick]

Yeah, it has been a while!

They had these on older tests, but I don't remember seeing one in a long time. I think the approach you described is reasonable.

I used to always think along these lines:
- it should somewhat flow from the ACTUAL last sentence of the passage
- it should not sound like it's starting some NEW paragraph / new idea
- it should not undercut anything the author was previously saying