Q2 - Mayor of Outerville, a suburb of Center City

[lsataddict]

Can someone please explain why "B" is the correct response? I narrowed it down to "A" and "B," but went with "A" because it was explicitly stated in the first sentence. I interpreted the train renovation argument as the plan for how the Mayor insists that Outerville try to attract more residents. I know the entire stimulus is support for why the train station should be renovated, but it seemed like that was a subsidiary conclusion. Thanks!

[ohthatpatrick]

Let me begin with something you wrote at the end there:
I know the entire stimulus is support for why the train station should be renovated, but it seemed like that was a subsidiary conclusion

There's a little internal contradiction there. If the entire stimulus is support for X, then X is the main conclusion!

By contrast, when we examine (A), we could ask (as we do with anything we're considering as the Conclusion):
1. Is it an opinion?
2. Is it supported?

So yes and yes.

It is an opinion that "we should attract more residents"
why?
Outerville must grow if it is to survive.

The train discussion is NOT a reason for why we should attract more residents. So the whole train discussion falls outside the umbrella of "should we or shouldn't we attract more residents".

By contrast, (A) falls underneath the umbrella of (B).

(B): We should renovate the train station.
why?
Because we want to attract new residents
+
the best way for attracting new residents is to renovate the train station.

Would you agree it sounds weird to go the other way around?

(A) We should try to attract more residents.
why?
Because we should renovate the train station.

Here, I'm using the "Why Test", but if you prefer, you can also analyze subsidiary vs. main conclusion using the "Therefore Test".

Which makes more sense:
We want to attract more residents, THEREFORE we should renovate the train station.
or
We should renovate the train station, THEREFORE we want to attract more residents.

Hopefully you agree that the 1st one makes more sense.

The other big clue this question offers us (although it's subtle) is that the question stem says, "The argument leads to the conclusion that ...".

There's another similarly worded variation of this that says, "This argument is structured to establish the conclusion that ..."

This basically warns you that the main conclusion is implied; it hasn't been explicitly said.

Hence, we would be wise to be suspicious of picking the explicitly written subsidiary conclusions of "so we should attract more residents" or "therefore people want to live in towns where train travel is pleasant".

Hope this helps.