LSAT Logical Reasoning: Role of Fact

Question Type: Role of Fact
Some of the questions ask about the role, or function, of a specific fact that is included
in the stimulus argument.
Some sample question stems are
1. The claim that taxes should increase in proportion to a person’s income plays
which one of the following roles in the argument?
2. The claim in the first sentence of the passage plays which one of the following
roles in the argument?
3. Joshua’s statement that “this claim simply cannot be proved” plays which one of
the following roles in his argument?
4. Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the
passage by the claim that fish have gills?
Strategies
To answer these questions correctly, you must determine the reason why the author
included this particular fact or detail. Most of the incorrect answer choices will either be
too narrow or too broad, or beyond the scope of the stimulus argument.
Sample Role of Fact Question
Consider the following example:

1. Some environmentalists have argued that there are two independently sufficient
justifications for recycling waste materials: one based on economics and the other
based on the aversion to the continued consumption of pristine global resources.
But suppose that recycling were not economically efficient. Then it would be less
clear that an aversion to consuming pristine global resources is enough of a reason
to recycle.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the argument
by the supposition that recycling is not economically efficient?
(A) It is used to disprove the environmentalist position that we should recycle.
(B) It is used to show that the two reasons given by environmentalists are each
individually sufficient.
(C) It is used to disprove the claim that recycling is beneficial.
(D) It is used to weaken the claim that consumption of pristine resources is
sufficient reason to recycle.
(E) It is used to show that there is no sufficient reason for recycling.
The best answer is D. The author of the argument asks the reader to go along with
the supposition that recycling is not economically efficient in order to show that a mere
aversion to consuming pristine resources might not be a sufficient, independent justification
for recycling after all. Answer choices A, C, and E are incorrect because the argument
does not actually show that there is no support for recycling. Answer choice B is
incorrect because the argument is meant to question the reasons given for recycling, not
to shore up the reasons given by environmentalists.