LSAT 152 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q2

LR Question 2 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Policy analyst: Those concerned with safeguarding public health by …

QUESTION TYPE: Identify the Conclusion

CONCLUSION: Reducing car usage would protect public health better than automotive safety measures.

REASONING: Traveling by car is itself a major risk factor.

ANALYSIS: That’s a pretty all-or-nothing approach. But alas, this isn’t a Flawed Reasoning question.

We want to know what the conclusion is. The policy analyst thinks that since driving by car at all is dangerous, the best thing to do is reduce how much people drive. The focus on other safety measures like seat belts isn’t enough.

___________

1. This is the goal we’re working towards. The analyst’s argument is about how to achieve that goal.
2. They’re already doing that, but they’re focusing on safety measures. The analyst thinks we should focus on reducing how much people drive.
3. Sure, the author probably agrees with this. But their point is that there’s a different way that would be more effective.
4. CORRECT. This is the analyst’s point. Current efforts are focused on automotive safety measures. But because driving itself is dangerous, it would be best to focus on reducing how much people drive.
5. The danger of driving is part of the reasoning, not the conclusion.