LSAT Main Conclusion Questions Practice Questions with Answers

Standardized tests like the LSAT require students to identify the central point of a complex argument within a strict time limit. LSAT Main Conclusion Questions are a specific type of Logical Reasoning task where you must isolate the author's primary claim from the supporting evidence and intermediate background information. These questions form the bedrock of the LSAT Prep curriculum because they test your ability to distinguish between premises and the ultimate point the author is trying to prove.

Concept Explanation

An LSAT Main Conclusion question asks you to identify the specific statement that represents the author's final point or primary thesis. In these arguments, the structure typically consists of premises (supporting facts), a main conclusion, and sometimes intermediate conclusions that support the main one. To succeed, you must avoid being distracted by "intermediate conclusions"—statements that are supported by some evidence but also serve as evidence for a larger point. A reliable way to test if a statement is the main conclusion is the "Therefore Test": if Statement A supports Statement B, then Statement B is more likely to be the conclusion. Unlike the Hard GRE Main Idea Questions which often focus on passage themes, LSAT questions focus on the logical mechanics of a specific argument.

Solved Examples

1. Example 1: Identifying the Shift

   Argument: Some critics argue that the new city hall is an eyesore. However, this view is misguided. The building’s unique geometry reflects the city’s industrial heritage, and it has already won several architectural awards.

   1. Identify the premises: The building reflects heritage and won awards.
   2. Identify the counter-view: Critics say it's an eyesore.
   3. Identify the author's stance: "This view is misguided."
   4. Solution: The main conclusion is that the critics' view that the city hall is an eyesore is incorrect.
2. Example 2: The Intermediate Conclusion Trap

   Argument: Because the price of wheat has doubled, bread prices will rise. Since bread is a staple food, this price hike will lead to widespread food insecurity. Therefore, the government must subsidize local farmers.

   1. Premise: Wheat price doubled.
   2. Intermediate Conclusion: Bread prices will rise.
   3. Intermediate Conclusion: Widespread food insecurity will occur.
   4. Main Conclusion: The government must subsidize local farmers.
   5. Solution: The final "therefore" indicates the ultimate recommendation, which is the government subsidy.
3. Example 3: Hidden Conclusions

   Argument: The movie was not a success. After all, it failed to earn back its production budget, and most reviews were negative.

   1. Premise 1: Failed to earn back budget.
   2. Premise 2: Negative reviews.
   3. Solution: The first sentence, "The movie was not a success," is the main conclusion because the rest of the sentences provide reasons to believe it.

Practice Questions

1. Argument: Modern diet fads often claim that eliminating carbohydrates is the key to weight loss. But carbohydrates are the body's primary energy source. Eliminating them entirely can lead to lethargy and nutrient deficiencies. Thus, a balanced diet is superior to any restrictive low-carb fad.

2. Argument: The company's profits declined this quarter because of a global supply chain disruption. Since the disruption is expected to last another six months, the company will likely see reduced profits for the rest of the year. Consequently, shareholders should prepare for lower dividend payouts.

3. Argument: Many people believe that legalizing a behavior makes it more common. However, data from countries that decriminalized small amounts of certain drugs shows that usage rates remained stable. This indicates that the legal status of a behavior is not the primary driver of public participation in that behavior.

4. Argument: High-speed rail is expensive to build, but it significantly reduces carbon emissions by providing an alternative to short-haul flights. Given the urgent need to address climate change, the high initial cost is a necessary investment for the future.

5. Argument: Some historians argue that the industrial revolution began solely due to technological innovation. But innovation requires capital, and capital was only available because of expanded global trade routes. Therefore, trade expansion was the true catalyst for the industrial revolution.

6. Argument: Increased screen time has been linked to sleep disturbances in teenagers. Sleep is essential for cognitive development. Thus, parents who want their children to succeed academically should limit their screen time before bed.

7. Argument: The new tax law will reduce the deficit by closing loopholes. However, it will also increase the tax burden on middle-class families. Because a healthy economy depends on middle-class spending, this law will ultimately harm the national economy.

8. Argument: A study showed that plants grow faster when exposed to classical music. This suggests that sound vibrations affect biological processes. Consequently, we should reconsider how noise pollution in urban areas affects local flora.

Answers & Explanations

1. Answer: A balanced diet is superior to any restrictive low-carb fad.

   Explanation: The author uses the facts about carbohydrates (energy source, deficiencies) to refute the fad diets and reach the final judgment that a balanced diet is better.

2. Answer: Shareholders should prepare for lower dividend payouts.

   Explanation: The supply chain disruption leads to lower profits (intermediate conclusion), which in turn leads to the final conclusion about dividends.

3. Answer: The legal status of a behavior is not the primary driver of public participation in that behavior.

   Explanation: The author uses evidence from decriminalized drug usage to support this general claim about the relationship between law and behavior.

4. Answer: The high initial cost [of high-speed rail] is a necessary investment for the future.

   Explanation: The author acknowledges the cost but concludes that it is justified due to the environmental benefits.

5. Answer: Trade expansion was the true catalyst for the industrial revolution.

   Explanation: The argument refutes the "innovation only" theory by showing innovation depended on trade, making trade the primary cause.

6. Answer: Parents who want their children to succeed academically should limit their screen time before bed.

   Explanation: The links between screen time, sleep, and cognitive development serve as premises for the final recommendation to parents.

7. Answer: This law will ultimately harm the national economy.

   Explanation: While the law closes loopholes, the author argues the chain reaction (middle-class burden -> less spending) results in economic harm.

8. Answer: We should reconsider how noise pollution in urban areas affects local flora.

   Explanation: The music study is a premise used to support the final suggestion that we need to look at urban noise pollution.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the main conclusion always at the end of the paragraph?

No, the main conclusion can appear at the beginning, middle, or end of an LSAT stimulus. Test writers often place it in the first sentence or the middle to make it harder to find by just scanning.

What is the difference between a premise and a conclusion?

A premise is a statement offered as evidence or support, whereas a conclusion is the claim that the premises are intended to prove. If you ask "Why should I believe this?", the answer will be the premises.

Can a question have two main conclusions?

An LSAT argument will only have one main conclusion, though it may contain several intermediate conclusions or sub-arguments. One statement will always be the final destination of the logic.

How can I avoid the intermediate conclusion trap?

Ask yourself if the statement you identified supports anything else in the passage. If it does, it is an intermediate conclusion; if it is the "end of the line," it is the main conclusion.

Are conclusion indicator words always reliable?

Indicator words like "thus" or "therefore" are helpful but not definitive. Sometimes they introduce an intermediate conclusion, so you must always check the logical relationship between all parts of the argument.

How do these questions relate to other LSAT tasks?

Identifying the conclusion is a prerequisite for almost every other question type, including Writing Strategy Questions or logical flaw questions. If you cannot find the conclusion, you cannot accurately evaluate the reasoning.