LSAT 101 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q14

LR Question 14 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Steven: The allowable blood alcohol level for drivers…

QUESTION TYPE: Point at Issue

ARGUMENTS: Steven thinks that we should cut the legal blood alcohol limit, to stop social drinkers from driving.

Miguel thinks that won’t help, because heavy drinkers are the biggest problem.

ANALYSIS: Steven and Miguel disagree on whether we should cut the legal blood alcohol limit.

They also disagree on the impact social drinkers have. Steven thinks we’d have much safer highways without them. Miguel says that taking them off the road would have little impact.

___________

1. CORRECT. Steven says the roads would be a lot safer without social drinkers. Miguel says we’d see little effect from taking them off the roads.
2. Neither of them mentioned whether there was a direct correlation between blood alcohol and safety. (Direct correlation means that as one variable increases or decreases, so does the other.)
3. Miguel says yes. Steven doesn’t say. He probably agrees, since he thinks social drinkers also are a big threat.
4. Steven says yes. Miguel never said he thought all social drinkers were safe drivers. He might even say that some drivers are a danger even when sober.
5. We don’t actually know what either thinks about someone in this range (imagine around 0.6x the legal limit) so any inferences would be speculative.

Recap: The question begins with “Steven: The allowable blood alcohol level for drivers”. It is a Point at Issue question. Learn more about LSAT Point at Issue questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.