LSAT 125 – Section 2 – Question 07

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 07

June 2008

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:18

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
PT125 S2 Q07
+LR
Most strongly supported +MSS
Fill in the blank +Fill
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
A
4%
155
B
7%
157
C
85%
163
D
2%
158
E
3%
160
128
140
153
 +Easier 145.417 +SubsectionEasier

Environmentalist: The excessive atmospheric buildup of carbon dioxide, which threatens the welfare of everyone in the world, can be stopped only by reducing the burning of fossil fuels. Any country imposing the strict emission standards on the industrial burning of such fuels that this reduction requires, however, would thereby reduce its gross national product. No nation will be willing to bear singlehandedly the costs of an action that will benefit everyone. It is obvious, then, that the catastrophic consequences of excessive atmospheric carbon dioxide are unavoidable unless _______.

Summary

According to the environmentalist, excessive atmospheric carbon dioxide threatens everyone’s welfare, and can only be stopped by reducing fossil fuel use. However, any country that participated in this reduction would also reduce its GNP. Also, no country would willingly take on the entire cost of an action that helps everyone. Thus, the threat of excess atmospheric carbon can only be avoided if... what?

In Lawgic:

P1: stop carbon excess → reduce fossil fuels

P2: reduce fossil fuels → reduce GNP

P3: country → /willing to bear entire cost

C: stop carbon excess → ?

Strongly Supported Conclusions

From the stimulus, we can conclude that avoiding the threat of excess atmospheric carbon dioxide can only be avoided if multiple countries work together to share the burden of reducing fossil fuel use.

A
all nations become less concerned with pollution than with the economic burdens of preventing it

This is anti-supported. The whole problem for the environmentalist is that each individual country is too concerned with economics, and not concerned enough with pollution. Shifting the balance further towards economics definitely wouldn’t avoid the carbon crisis.

B
multinational corporations agree to voluntary strict emission standards

This is not supported. The environmentalist doesn’t indicate the role of multinational corporations at all, and talks about strict government regulation rather than voluntary emission standards.

C
international agreements produce industrial emission standards

This is strongly supported. The environmentalist’s argument is that countries aren’t willing to work alone to impose industrial emission standards. International agreements would share the economic burden, thus allowing a solution through participation.

D
distrust among nations is eliminated

This is not supported. The environmentalist doesn’t suggest anything about distrust among nations. It may be tempting to assume that distrust is the obstacle, but we just don’t have enough information about nations’ intentions and their leaders’ beliefs.

E
a world government is established

This is not supported. The environmentalist is leading to the conclusion that some kind of international participation is necessary, but world government is an extreme way to do so, and it’s not an option suggested in the stimulus. This just goes too far.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 125 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply