LSAT 138 – Section 3 – Question 03

LSAT 138 - Section 3 - Question 03

December 2012

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

Target time: 0:48

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
PT138 S3 Q03	+LR	Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw Sampling +Smpl Math +Math	A 2% 156 B 93% 165 C 1% 150 D 1% 150 E 4% 157	129 138 148	+Easier	147.528 +SubsectionMedium

Statistics reveal that more collisions between bicycles and motor vehicles occur on roads having specifically designated bicycle lanes than on roads having no such lanes. Hence, adding such lanes to existing roads is unlikely to enhance the safety of bicyclists.

Summarize Argument

The author argues that adding bike lanes to roads will not make cyclists safer because more bike accidents tend to happen on roads with bike lanes than on those without.

Identify and Describe Flaw

This is a correlation-causation fallacy. The argument overlooks the likelihood that roads with bike lanes have more cyclists, which could naturally explain the higher number of accidents without indicating that the bike lanes fail to make cyclists safer. In fact, there could be far fewer cyclists using the roads without lanes precisely because those roads are less safe.

overlooks the possibility that injuries sustained by bicyclists in accidents on roads with bicycle lanes are as serious, on average, as those sustained by bicyclists in accidents on roads without such lanes

This possibility is not a problem for the conclusion. Injuries being just as serious when bike lanes are present would provide yet another reason to believe that the lanes won’t improve safety.

fails to address the possibility that there are more bicyclists riding on roads with bicycle lanes than there are riding on roads without such lanes

This describes how the argument fails to consider that more accidents may be occurring on roads with bike lanes simply because there are more cyclists on those roads.

takes for granted that any road alteration that enhances the safety of bicyclists also enhances the safety of motorists

The argument never mentions motorist safety; the conclusion is about the safety of cyclists.

concludes that adding bicycle lanes to roads will fail to enhance the safety of bicyclists on the grounds that only some roads that currently have such lanes are safe

The argument cites a correlation between bike lanes and accidents as support; it doesn’t say that only some roads with lanes are safe.

takes statistical evidence that fails to support a conclusion concerning the safety of bicyclists as evidence that proves the opposite conclusion

The argument never opposes any other conclusion; it just assumes that a correlation between roads with lanes and accidents indicates that the lanes don’t enhance safety.

Cookie Cutters
64.1.13
57.3.18
55.3.09
39.2.05
25.4.24

LSAT PrepTest 138 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course