LSAT 152 – Section 2 – Question 22

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:33

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView
Type Tags Answer
Choices
Curve Question
Difficulty
Psg/Game/S
Difficulty
Explanation
PT152 S2 Q22
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
7%
160
B
18%
162
C
5%
155
D
24%
159
E
46%
165
153
164
175
+Hardest 147.463 +SubsectionMedium

Although human economic exchange predates historical records, it is clear that the very first economies were based on barter and that money came later. This can be inferred from occasions in history when, in isolated places, currency largely disappeared from the local economy. At such times, the economy typically reverts to the original barter system, but then quickly abandons this form of exchange when currency becomes available again.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the very first economies were based on barter, with money coming later. This is based on the premise that, during times when the use of money disappears in isolated places, the economy typically “reverts to the original barter system.” These places then go back to money when it becomes available again.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The argument uses circular reasoning. In asserting as a premise that when money disappears in isolated places, the economy typically “reverts to the original barter system,” the author presupposes that barter was the original system. The author is trying to prove that the very first economies were based on barter, not money. So, when supporting that conclusion, it’s not persuasive for the author to assume that barter was “the original” (very first) system. This simply assumes that the conclusion is already true.

A
The argument concludes that something can cause a particular outcome merely because it is necessary for that outcome.
The conclusion doesn’t assert any causal relationship. It simply asserts that the first economies were based on barter, and money came later. This doesn’t say barter caused money to come about, or that anything caused barter.
B
The argument contains premises that contradict one another.
The premises do not contradict each other. It can be true that when money disappeared, places turned to a barter economy. Then, when money was available again, the economy turned back into one based on money.
C
The argument presumes that something should be done merely because historically it has been done.
The conclusion doesn’t assert that anything “should” be done. The author does not issue a command or recommendation or display any kind of value judgment. The conclusion is simply a descriptive one concerning whether the first economies were barter-based or money-based.
D
The argument infers a causal relation between two events merely from the fact that one event occurred before the other.
The author does not conclude or assume any causal relationship. He simply asserts that the first economies were based on barter, and money came later. This doesn’t imply barter caused money to come about, or that anything caused barter.
E
The argument relies on a premise that presupposes what the argument attempts to show in the conclusion.
(E) accurately describes the circular reasoning of the argument. A premise, in describing how an economy “reverts to the original barter system” presupposes what the argument atttempts to show in the conclusion — that the very first economies were based on barter.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply