Question

Criticism that the press panders to public sentiment neglects to consider that the press is a profit-making institution. Like other private enterprises, it has to make money to survive. If the press were not profit-making, who would support it? The only alternative is subsidy and, with it, outside control. It is easy to get subsidies for propaganda, but no one will subsidize honest journalism. It can be properly inferred from the passage that if the press is (A) not subsidized, it is in no danger of outside control (B) not subsidized, it will not produce propaganda (C) not to be subsidized, it cannot be a profit-making institution (D) to produce honest journalism, it must be a profit-making institution (E) to make a profit, it must produce honest journalism Questions 14-15 Lucien: Public-housing advocates claim that the many homeless people in this city are proof that there is insufficient housing available to them and therefore that more low-income apartments are needed. But that conclusion is absurd. Many apartments in my own building remain unrented and my professional colleagues report similar vacancies where they live. Since apartments clearly are available, homelessness is not a housing problem. Homelessness can, therefore, only be caused by people's inability or unwillingness to work to pay the rent. Maria: On the contrary, all recent studies show that a significant percentage of this city's homeless people hold regular jobs. These are people who lack neither will nor ability.

Short answer

(D) to produce honest journalism, it must be a profit-making institution.

Step-by-step solution

Understanding the Premise

The passage suggests that the press, being a profit-making institution, is reliant on making money to operate sustainably. Without being profit-making, the alternative would be subsidies leading to outside control. Honest journalism, as per the passage, cannot be subsidized because subsidies often lead to propaganda.

Identifying Key Information

The key point is that the press must generate profits to survive and avoid reliance on subsidies, which would introduce outside control and potentially lead to propaganda. Honest journalism needs the press to be independent, which is implied through profit-making rather than subsidy.

Analyzing the Conclusion

From the passage, it can be inferred that for the press to maintain honest journalism, it must be a profit-making institution to remain free of subsidy-based outside control and propaganda.

Selecting the Correct Inference

Option (D) 'to produce honest journalism, it must be a profit-making institution' aligns with the passage's message that the press needs to be profit-driven to independently deliver honest journalism without falling into the influence of subsidy-related control.

Key concepts

Logical Reasoning

Logical reasoning is a crucial skill when tackling LSAT preparation. It's all about understanding arguments and evaluating their validity. In logical reasoning, you often identify assumptions, deductions, and implications from given premises. With the exercise example, reasoning out why the press needs to be profit-making relies on understanding the logical flow between profit-making and independence.

Logical reasoning questions typically ask you to strengthen, weaken, or identify conclusions in arguments. They require a critical examination of the initial statement or premise, which leads you to a justifiable conclusion.

When analyzing the original exercise, notice how one concludes that the press must be profit-making. This reasoning is established through the logical relationship between financial independence and unbiased journalism. Practicing spotting these connections can significantly enhance your logical reasoning abilities.

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is about going beyond surface-level information and evaluating arguments more deeply. In our exercise example, critical thinking is crucial to analyze why subsidies might lead to propaganda, while profit-making helps maintain journalistic integrity.

To think critically, one must question assumptions, evaluate evidence, and synthesize the broader implications of the given arguments. In Lucien and Maria's argument, critical thinking helps you judge which statements are assumptions and which are conclusions based on available evidence.

By engaging in critical thinking, you'll understand more than just what is stated. You'll grasp the underlying concepts and how different pieces of evidence link to each other to form a coherent argument. This depth of understanding allows you to see beyond the obvious and tackle questions effectively.

Reading Comprehension

Reading comprehension is the ability to understand, interpret, and analyze written texts. For LSAT preparation, this involves recognizing nuances in arguments, such as those presented in our exercise with the press and housing arguments.

To excel in reading comprehension, focus on identifying the main idea, supporting details, and the purpose of each passage. In the original exercise, understanding the author's stance on press subsidies requires careful reading and consideration of the underlying implications.

Additionally, reading comprehension involves recognizing contrasting viewpoints, such as those between Lucien and Maria. Developing this skill helps in summarizing the gist of complex passages and in recognizing the significance of each argument within the broader context.

Effective reading comprehension ensures that you accurately discern the arguments presented, which is essential in determining valid conclusions from the text.

Argument Analysis

Argument analysis is a vital component when dealing with exercises involving logical reasoning and reading comprehension. It involves dissecting an argument to understand its main components: premises, conclusions, and possible assumptions.

When analyzing arguments, like Lucien's view on housing versus Maria's counter-arguments, it's essential to identify the structure. Start by pinpointing the claims being made, the evidence provided, and how these lead to the conclusions presented.

Argument analysis also involves discerning fallacies or weak points in reasoning. For instance, Lucien's assumption about homelessness solely being a consequence of not working is confronted by Maria with evidence to the contrary. This analysis helps in forming a more solid understanding of each position.

Practicing argument analysis not only aids in LSAT success but sharpens your ability to thoughtfully engage with real-world debates and discussions.