LSAT 131 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q4

LR Question 4 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Scientist: While studying centuries-old Antarctic ice

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Atmospheric pollution caused global temperatures to rise in the 1500s.

REASONING: There was a correlation between pollution and high temperatures. (i.e. they happened at the same time)

ANALYSIS: This argument presents a correlation, and assumes causation. It’s a classic LSAT error.

Whenever you see a correlation, it’s possible:

Pollution caused temperature rises.

Temperature rises caused pollution.

Some third factor led to both.

It’s a coincidence.

In this case, the fourth possibility seems the most likely way to weaken.

___________

1. The author never said rising temperatures were bad. They just talked about what caused them.
2. This is a different flaw.
   Example of flaw: The heat trapping pollutants caused a rise in temperatures. So every type of pollutant must cause a rise in temperatures.
3. This is a different flaw.
   Example of flaw: Pollution caused rising temperatures during this five year period. So pollution is the only possible cause of warming, in any historical period.
4. This is almost never a flaw. LSAT questions don’t have time to detail data methods, so we usually just have to assume it’s reliable unless there is an obvious problem.
   Example of flaw: My broken weather monitoring system told me that the temperature today is -200 degrees. We’d better put on jackets.
5. CORRECT. The argument merely shows that pollutants and warming were correlated. We can never assume this means one caused the other.