LSAT 134 – Section 1 – Question 10

LSAT 134 - Section 1 - Question 10

October 2011

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:10

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
PT134 S1 Q10
+LR
Weaken +Weak
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
77%
166
B
3%
159
C
9%
158
D
8%
159
E
3%
157
144
153
162
 +Harder 147.067 +SubsectionMedium

History provides many examples of technological innovations being strongly resisted by people whose working conditions without those innovations were miserable. This shows that social inertia is a more powerful determinant of human behavior than is the desire for comfort or safety.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that social inertia plays a greater role in human behavior than the desire for comfort or safety. As evidence, he cites the fact that many historical innovations were resisted by people whose lives these innovations would’ve improved.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that resisting technological innovation constitutes social inertia. He also assumes that people didn’t resist technological innovation for some reason other than social inertia. Finally, the author assumes that “many examples” of this one phenomenon are enough to draw a claim about the relative power of forces determining human behavior.

A
People correctly believe that technological innovations often cause job loss.
Social inertia wasn’t the reason why people resisted technological innovation. They were rightly concerned about losing their jobs.
B
People are often reluctant to take on new challenges.
That “reluctance” sounds like social inertia. Besides, we have no evidence these technological innovations were “challenges.”
C
Some examples of technological innovation have been embraced by workers.
This points out an exception. The author, however, doesn’t need his very general conclusion to be true in all historical cases. Social inertia may still be more powerful than the desire for comfort—just not always.
D
People tend to adapt easily to gradually implemented technological innovations.
If this is true, then in many cases technological innovations haven’t been implemented gradually. People evidently didn’t adapt easily in those cases, hence the resistance.
E
People correctly believe that technological innovations almost always increase workers’ productivity.
If this is true, why are workers resisting? Inertia would seem to be a totally valid hypothesis. We need something that weakens that hypothesis.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 134 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply