LSAT 17 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q25

LR Question 25 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: S: It would be premature to act to halt the threatened…

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: W disagrees with S. Reputable investigators agree that there will be warming between 1.5 and 4.5 degrees.

REASONING: W points out that scientists find discussions of accepted ideas to be quite boring. They prefer to discuss the unknown. (the implication is that they rarely discuss that they all agree that global warming is real.)

ANALYSIS: W adds perspective with his reply. Scientific disagreement is normal. They disagree all the time, but generally only about unknown topics (such as how much warming there will be.) They don’t spend much time discussing the fact that they all agree there will be warming.

___________

1. Technically W and S’s evidence is consistent. S says some scientists predict twice as much warming. W says that some scientists predict 4.5 degrees. That is three times as much as 1.5 degrees.
2. W seems to disagree with S’s conclusion.
3. Same as A. Technically W’s authorities do not conflict with S’s.
4. CORRECT. Yes. S points out that it’s quite normal for scientists to disagree about the amount of warming. They like disagreeing about the unknown. But they all agree that warming occurs.
5. This is not circular reasoning. W supports his conclusion by pointing out that scientists only tend to discuss things they don’t agree about.

Recap: The question begins with “S: It would be premature to act to halt the threatened”. It is a Method of Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Method of Reasoning questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.