LSAT 134 – Section 1 – Question 14

LSAT 134 - Section 1 - Question 14

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: 1:35

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 Q14
+LR
Argument part +AP
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Analogy +An
A
79%
166
B
5%
161
C
14%
158
D
1%
152
E
1%
156
141
151
161
 +Medium 147.067 +SubsectionMedium

Superconductor development will enable energy to be transported farther with less energy lost in transit. This will probably improve industrial productivity, for a similar improvement resulted when oil and natural gas replaced coal as the primary fossil fuels used in North America. Shipping costs, a function of the distance fossil fuels are shipped and the losses of material in transit, decreased for factory owners at that time.

The author concludes that superconductor development, which will enable more efficient energy transport, will improve industrial productivity. As evidence, the author offers an analogous case where oil replaced coal as the primary fossil fuel and decreased shipping costs in the process.

Identify Argument Part
The referenced text is the argument’s main conclusion. The argument uses an analogy to explain how superconductor development will improve industrial productivity.

A
It is a conclusion for which the claim that shipping costs for fossil fuels are partly a function of the losses of material in transit is offered as partial support.
Shipping costs are partly a function of transit losses, and superconductor development will enable more efficient transit. Thus the conclusion, superconductor develop will improve industrial productivity. The first premise is the “partial support” the answer refers to.
B
It is a generalization for which the claim that superconductor development will enable energy to be transported farther with less energy lost in transit is offered as an illustration.
This isn’t a generalization. Instead, it’s a specific prediction the author attempts to support through an analogy.
C
It is an assumption supporting the conclusion that superconductor development will enable energy to be transported farther with less energy lost in transit.
This is a conclusion that’s supported by the argument, rather than support itself. It’s not assumed—it’s reasoned to be likely.
D
It is a premise offered to support the claim that oil and natural gas have replaced coal as the primary fossil fuels used in North America.
The referenced text isn’t a premise. Instead, it’s a conclusion supported by premises, such as the analogy about oil and natural gas in North America.
E
It is cited as evidence that shipping costs are a function of the distances fossil fuels are shipped and the losses of material in transit.
The referenced text concludes that superconductor development will improve productivity. It doesn’t support the definition of “shipping costs,” which is what this answer refers to.

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