QUESTION TEXT: People in the tourist industry know that…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: We don’t have to worry that the tourist industry will damage the seaside.
REASONING: Excessive development hurts both the environment and the tourist industry. The tourist industry would never hurt itself on purpose.
ANALYSIS: There are two flaws. First, regular, non-excessive development might help the tourist industry, but still hurt the environment.
Second, the tourist industry might unknowingly hurt both itself and the environment.
___________
- We don’t need to support most claims. On the LSAT, take claims as given. We’d need pages and pages of evidence to prove each claim.
- The argument never said that the tourist industry doesn’t coexist with pollution (i.e. pollution from a factory that damages the seaside and affects the tourist industry). The conclusion was that the tourist industry won’t cause pollution.
- Actually, the argument always refers to the entire tourist industry.
- CORRECT. Lots of people do dumb things, including the tourist industry.
- This is a different error. It’s like saying: the tourist industry will probably pollute, therefore they will pollute, and we should ban the tourist industry.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply