LSAT 124 – Section 3 – Question 21
LSAT 124 - Section 3 - Question 21
December 2007You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.
Target time: 1:36
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PT124 S3 Q21 |
+LR
| Most strongly supported +MSS Net Effect +NetEff | A
3%
157
B
2%
158
C
71%
166
D
13%
160
E
11%
160
|
145 155 165 |
+Harder | 145.896 +SubsectionMedium |
Summary
There are people who argue against the proposed hazardous waste site based on implausible scenarios where the site fails. These people overlook the significant risks associated with delaying moving the waste from its currently unsafe location. If the waste is not moved until a safe site is found, the waste will remain in its current location for years. This is because it's impossible to guarantee that any proposed sight will meet the criteria for being labeled “safe.” Keeping the waste at the current unsafe location for that long presents unacceptable risks.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
The waste should be moved to a new site to reduce risks
A
The waste should never have been stored in its current location.
The stimulus does address past decisions. It is purely concerned with what future actions should be taken.
B
The waste should be placed in the most secure location that can ever be found.
This is antisupported. The stimulus argues against waiting for the most secure location because leaving the waste in the current location presents far too many risks.
C
Moving the waste to the proposed site would reduce the threat posed by the waste.
The stimulus acknowledges that moving the waste is risky, but that it would outweigh the risk of leaving it in its current location. Thus, moving the waste to the proposed site would decrease the overall risk.
D
Whenever waste must be moved, one should limit the amount of time allotted to locating alternative waste storage sites.
This is too broad to support. The stimulus is only concerned with this specific instance and there is no indication that this reasoning should be applicable to “whenever waste must be moved.”
E
Any site to which the waste could be moved will be safer than its present site.
This is too strong to support. The stimulus suggests that the *proposed* site would be safer, not any site whatsoever. What if the waste was dumped on a daycare?
Take PrepTest
Review Results
LSAT PrepTest 124 Explanations
Section 1 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
Section 2 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
- Question 26
Section 3 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment. You can get a free account here.