PT21.S2.Q23

PrepTest 21 - Section 2 - Question 23

Hide analysis

Antinuclear activist: The closing of the nuclear power plant is a victory for the antinuclear cause. ██ ████ ██████████ █ ███████ ██████████████ ██ ███ █████ ████████ ████ ████ ██████ ███████ ████ ██████ ███████

███████ █████ █████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ ████████████ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ████████ ████ ███ ████ ██ ████████ ██████ ███████████ ███ ██████ ████████ ████ █████████ █████████ ███████████ ████ ██ ███ ███ ██████ ██████████████ ███ ████████ ██████████████ ████ ████████ ███ █████████ ████████

Two Lenses On The Flaw

This stimulus features a common flaw – the argument assumes an event can only have one cause (“We had safety reasons to close the plant, so we therefore had no other reasons”). But the correct answer brings a different lens – the argument assumes two categories are mutually exclusive when in fact they may overlap (i.e. some economic reasons can also be seen as safety reasons). Here’s a summary that captures both these themes:

Premise: We faced a bunch of costs (some were low-key safety related) that made the plant unprofitable.
________
Conclusion: We didn’t close the plant for safety reasons; we closed it for cost reasons.

So yeah, just because there were economic reasons to close the plant doesn’t mean there weren’t also safety reasons. Arguments that assume something can only have one cause are quite common on the test. My personal meme for this is “por que no los dos?”

Additionally, some of the supposedly-economic considerations the manager cites could also be painted as safety considerations. It costs a lot of money to make safety repairs – is that not a safety consideration?

Show answer
23.

Which one of the following, ██ █████ ████ ████████ ████████ ███ ████████████ █████ ██ ████████

a

The plant had ███████ ███ ███ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ███████ ████████

This indicates that the plant would have closed regardless of whether the antinuclear activists were involved or not, and therefore weakens their claim of victory.

Directionally wrong
4%
b

The mandate for ███████████ ███ ███████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ ████████ ███████ ██ █ ██████ ██ ████████ ████ ███████████ ███████

This indicates that the antinuclear activists played an important role in the plant's closure, backing up their claim to victory.

87%
c

The plant would ███ ████ ██████ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ███ ████ ██████████

We don't know whether "the antinuclear cause" was involved in the creation of these nonnuclear power sources.

3%
d

Per unit of ███████████ █████████ ███ █████ ███ ███ ███████ █████████ █████ ██ ███ ███████ █████ ██████

This indicates that the plant was just bad for its own reasons, undermining the idea that the antinuclear cause's efforts (whatever they were) were instrumental in the plant's closure.

Directionally wrong
3%
e

The plant that ██████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ███████ ██████ █████ ██ ██ ██████████ ███████ ████ █████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████ ███████████

This lays out a downside of the plant's closure, undermining the idea that closing the plant will end up benefiting the antinuclear cause.

Directionally wrong
2%

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

It takes about five minutes.

Take the free diagnostic
More free LSAT prep: Sample LSAT questions Full-length diagnostic & practice test All free LSAT resources

Confirm action

Are you sure?