LSAT 150 – Section 3 – Question 16

LSAT 150 - Section 3 - Question 16

June 2018

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

Target time: 1:08

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
PT150 S3 Q16	+LR	Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw Causal Reasoning +CausR Net Effect +NetEff	A 1% 158 B 78% 163 C 4% 155 D 12% 160 E 4% 156	133 146 158	+Medium	148.057 +SubsectionMedium

Automobile executive: Our critics say that the communications devices installed in our automobiles are dangerously distracting to drivers. But these critics are wrong. Drivers who want to use communications devices are going to use them regardless. Our devices are easier for drivers to use, and hence they are safer.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

The executive concludes that critics are wrong about her communications devices being dangerously distracting. She supports this by saying that drivers who want to use communications devices will do so regardless, and that these devices are safer because they are easier to use.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The executive makes the unwarranted assumption that the devices are safer just because they're easier to use. But even if they are safer than other devices, she still doesn't address the critics' concern that they are dangerously distracting, nor does she give any reason to believe that they are not dangerously distracting. The fact that they're easier to use and that drivers will use them anyway doesn't change the fact that they might still be dangerously distracting.

attempts to apply a general principle to a situation to which that principle is not applicable

The executive doesn’t attempt to apply any principle at all. She also doesn’t wrongly apply a generalization to a specific situation. Instead, she draws a conclusion about the communications devices based on premises that are also about the communications devices.

fails to address the substantive point of the criticism that it is responding to

The executive fails to address the critics’ main point: that the communications devices are dangerously distracting. Just because they're easier to use and drivers will use them anyway doesn't change the fact that they might still be dangerously distracting.

treats a condition that is necessary to establish its conclusion as one that is sufficient to establish that conclusion

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing necessary and sufficient conditions. The executive doesn’t make this mistake; her argument doesn’t rely on conditional logic. Instead, she counters the critics’ position without actually addressing their criticism.

presumes, without providing justification, that all communications devices are the same with respect to driver distraction

Actually, the executive explicitly claims that her communications devices are safer with respect to driver distraction. She doesn’t assume that all devices are the same.

is based on premises that presume the truth of the argument’s conclusion

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of circular reasoning. The executive doesn’t make this mistake. Her premises may not support her conclusion well, but they are distinct from her conclusion.

LSAT 150 – Section 3 – Question 16

LSAT 150 - Section 3 - Question 16

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 150 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel