LSAT 153 – Section 3 – Question 03

LSAT 153 - Section 3 - Question 03

June 2019

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:58

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
PT153 S3 Q03
+LR
Sufficient assumption +SA
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
2%
149
B
1%
152
C
2%
158
D
94%
162
E
1%
140
130
138
145
 +Easier 146.755 +SubsectionMedium

Columnist: Although it is our civic duty to protect the population against hazards to public health, we should not reroute high-tension power lines away from heavily populated areas. This is because our limited resources should be devoted to protecting the population only against well-substantiated threats to public health.

Summary
The author concludes that we should not reroute high-tension power lines away from heavily populated areas. Why? Because our resources should be spent to protect ONLY against well-substantiated threats to public health.

Missing Connection
Is having high-tension power lines near heavily populated areas a well-substantiated threat to public health? It might be...the premises don’t say it isn’t. So the author’s conclusion isn’t justified by the premise right now. In order to make the argument valid, we want to establish that high-tension power lines near heavily populated areas is NOT a well-substantiated threat to public health. This would then justify a claim that we shouldn’t spend resources trying to reroute the lines.

A
Public health would be damaged by the loss of electric power.
(A) doesn’t establish that high-tension power lines in heavily populated areas is not a well-substantiated threat. So it doesn’t guarantee that we shouldn’t reroute the lines.
B
Proponents of expensive safety measures with respect to high-tension power lines ignore economic realities.
(B) doesn’t establish that high-tension power lines in heavily populated areas is not a well-substantiated threat. So it doesn’t guarantee that we shouldn’t reroute the lines.
C
Scientific evidence exists for causal links between various modern practices and threats to public health.
(C) doesn’t establish that high-tension power lines in heavily populated areas is not a well-substantiated threat. So it doesn’t guarantee that we shouldn’t reroute the lines.
D
No investigation of the effects of high-tension power lines has established any health threat to people.
If no investigation has shown any health threat from these lines, then the potential threat isn’t well-substantiated. In connection with the premise, this allows us to conclude we shouldn’t use any resources toward protecting the population from high-tension power lines.
E
Rerouting high-tension power lines away from heavily populated areas would hinder our ability to study the effects of power lines on people.
(E) doesn’t establish that high-tension power lines in heavily populated areas is not a well-substantiated threat. So it doesn’t guarantee that we shouldn’t reroute the lines.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 153 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply