LSAT 2 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q24

LR Question 24 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: In opposing the 1970 Clean Air Act, the United States…

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: We should not listen to automakers.

REASONING: In the past, they claimed a similar proposal was impossible. Yet they were able to meet the standards of the 1970 Clean Air Act with ease.

ANALYSIS: This argument is claiming that we should not listen to the automakers now, because they were wrong on a similar issue in the past.

Note that it’s possible the automakers are right this time, even though they were wrong last time.

___________

1. What is the contradiction? If you can’t answer this question, don’t pick this answer choice. (There is no contradiction.)
2. Which false information? Same as in A: don’t pick this answer choice unless you can answer this question. The automakers were wrong in the past, but there is no evidence they are presently relying on false information.
3. There is no flaw mentioned. The stimulus mentions that the automakers were wrong without mentioning why.
4. CORRECT. Yes. The automakers held a very similar position in the past, and events proved them wrong. The implication is that some method would be found of meeting the new standards if they were adopted.
5. No such evidence is provided. It is possible that this time the standards are impossible to meet.

Recap: The question begins with “In opposing the 1970 Clean Air Act, the United States”. It is a Method of Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Method of Reasoning questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.