LSAT 146 – Section 2 – Question 25

LSAT 146 - Section 2 - Question 25

June 2016

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:15

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
PT146 S2 Q25
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
8%
158
B
2%
153
C
2%
152
D
70%
164
E
17%
157
149
156
162
 +Harder 148.55 +SubsectionMedium

Substantial economic growth must be preceded by technological innovations that expanding industries incorporate into their production or distribution procedures. Since a worldwide ban on the use of fossil fuels would surely produce many technological innovations, it is obvious that such a ban would be followed by an economic boom rather than by the economic depression forecast by the critics of such a ban.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that a ban on fossil fuels would be followed by substantial economic growth. This is based on the fact that substantial economic growth requires the occurrence of technological innovations. And, a ban on fossil fuels would produce many technological innovations.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author confuses a sufficient condition with a necessary condition. Technological innovations are necessary for substantial economic growth (the word “must” indicates necessity). But the author thinks that having technological innovations will be sufficient for substantial economic growth. This is why the author thinks the ban on fossil fuels will be followed by an economic boom.

A
The argument assumes the truth of the conclusion for which it purports to be providing evidence.
(A) describes circular reasoning. The conclusion is not a restatement of one of the premises.
B
The argument attempts to establish the falsehood of a proposition by criticizing the reasoning of those who assert its truth.
The author doesn’t criticize someone else’s reasoning.
C
The argument attempts to establish a conclusion on the basis of stronger evidence than the conclusion requires.
There’s nothing flawed about establishing a conclusion using evidence stronger than needed. Anyway, (C) doesn’t happen because the evidence here isn’t enough to prove the conclusion.
D
The argument confuses a necessary condition for a phenomenon with a sufficient condition for that phenomenon.
The argument confuses a necessary condition (tech innovations) for a phenomenon (substantial economic growth) with a sufficient condition for that phenomenon. This is flawed because we aren’t told tech innovations are enough to guarantee substantial economic growth.
E
The argument presumes, without providing warrant, that because certain conditions only sometimes precede a certain phenomenon, these conditions always bring about the phenomenon.
The conclusion is based on the fact that any time there’s substantial economic growth, there must be tech innovations that preceded. This is a claim that sub. economic growth requires tech innovations. Not a claim that tech innovations “only sometimes” happen before growth.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 146 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply