LSAT 102 – Section 3 – Question 16

LSAT 102 - Section 3 - Question 16

June 1998

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:32

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT102 S3 Q16
+LR
+Exp
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Link Assumption +LinkA
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
8%
157
B
8%
161
C
83%
165
D
0%
156
E
1%
156
130
143
157
 +Medium 147.613 +SubsectionMedium

Motorcoach driver: Professional drivers spend much more time driving, on average, than do other people and hence are more competent drivers than are other, less experienced drivers. Therefore, the speed limit on major highways should not be reduced, because that action would have the undesirable effect of forcing some people who are now both law-abiding and competent drivers to break the law.

Police officer: All drivers can drive within the legal speed limit if they wish, so it is not true to say that reducing the speed limit would be the cause of such illegal behavior.

Speaker 1 Summary

The motorcoach driver claims that we shouldn’t reduce highway speed limits. Why not? Because doing so would “force” some competent drivers to break the law, presumably by speeding. Who would these drivers be? We can infer the motorcoach driver is talking about professional drivers, who are better-than-average drivers because they spend more time driving. (The assumption is that the professionals wouldn’t reduce their speed to respect a new limit.)

Speaker 2 Summary

The police officer argues that lowering the speed limit would not actually be the cause of people speeding. This is because anyone can drive at the limit if they choose to—so the drivers’ choices, not the limit, would be to blame for speeding.

Objective

We need to find a point of disagreement. The driver and the officer disagree about whether lowering the speed limit would cause any drivers to speed.

A
it would be desirable to reduce the speed limit on major highways

The motorcoach driver disagrees with this, but the police officer doesn’t state an opinion. The police officer never mentions whether or not we should change the speed limit.

B
professional drivers will drive within the legal speed limit if that limit is reduced

The motorcoach driver disagrees with this, but the police officer neither agrees nor disagrees. The police officer doesn’t say whether professional drivers actually will speed; the point is just that if they did so it would be their own fault.

C
reducing the speed limit on major highways would cause some professional drivers to break the law

The motorcoach driver agrees with this, but the police officer disagrees, so this is the point at issue. The police officer claims that the cause of speeding would not be the lower limit, but would instead be that the drivers chose to speed.

D
professional drivers are more competent drivers than are other, less experienced drivers

The motorcoach driver agrees with this, but the police officer doesn’t state an opinion. The police officer doesn’t say anything at all about the competency of professional versus non-professional drivers.

E
all drivers wish to drive within the speed limit

Neither speaker states an opinion about this claim. Neither the motorcoach driver nor the police officer makes any kind of statement about what drivers actually wish to do.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 102 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply