PT22.S4.Q13 "causal claim" vs. "if then" statement

ALong_1616

Hey guys,

How can we tell the difference between a causal assertion and a “if then” statement?

I chose D by intuition, but I did struggle for a long while.

JY mentions “causation” between using a car phone & pose a threat to safe driving during his explanation.

In essence, if A causes B, then decrease A also decrease the likelihood of B.

Yes, if we explain it in such a manner, then it makes sense to me.

However, I wonder how do we know “using a car phone seriously distracts the driver, which in turn poses a threat to safe driving” is not a “if then” statement?

If using car phone –> pose threat to safe driving

If this is the case, /using car phone does NOT lead to /pose threat to safe driving (the oldest trick in the book)

Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-22-section-4-question-13/

LivinLaVidaLSAT

Look at the phrase you pulled from the stimulus. It's helpful to look for words/phrases that indicates the type of reasoning used. There's language there that indicates causation (but not sufficient/necessary). Do you see it?

clear227

Conclusion: the new bill should be adopted.

Why?

It's dangerous. People wouldn't do the dangerous thing if it was illegal.

Prephrase: [it's an assumption argument, what is missing here? How do we close the link between a thing being dangerous and a new bill being adopted?]

We should always adopt bills that will make things less dangerous.

Answer: (d)

"using a car phone seriously distracts the driver, which in turn poses a threat to safe driving" could be an if/then statement... but so what? You are looking for an answer choice that links the premises to the conclusion. We are looking to make a world where the new bill should be adopted.

It sounds like you are trying to weaken something (the idea that car phones threaten safe driving) that doesn't matter here.