LSAT (Law School Admission Test)Logical ReasoningEasy
An architect proposes that a new city park should be designed with only native plant species. Her reasoning is that native plants require less water, fertilizer, and pest control, thereby reducing maintenance costs and promoting local biodiversity. A city council member responds, 'But many residents prefer the aesthetic of non-native ornamental flowers, and a park should primarily serve the preferences of its users.' The council member's response indicates a disagreement over which of the following?
- AThe definition of 'local biodiversity.'
- BThe availability of aesthetically pleasing native plant species.
- CThe effectiveness of native plants in reducing maintenance costs.
- DThe primary purpose that a city park should fulfill.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: D. The primary purpose that a city park should fulfill.
The architect frames the park's purpose in terms of environmental and economic benefits (less water, biodiversity). The council member frames it in terms of user preference and aesthetics. Their disagreement is fundamentally about what goal a city park should prioritize.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. The definition of 'local biodiversity' is not discussed or disputed by either party.
- B. The council member states a preference for non-native flowers, but doesn't explicitly claim that aesthetically pleasing native species are unavailable.
- C. The council member does not dispute the architect's claims about maintenance costs or water use.
Disagreement Over Principle
When two parties agree on facts but derive different conclusions because they hold different fundamental beliefs or values about what should be prioritized or how things ought to be.
- Often involves ethical or value-based claims
- Not a factual dispute
- Focuses on 'should' or 'ought'
Memory trick: Principles are like different rulebooks for the same game.