LSAT 103 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q16

LR Question 16 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: The recently negotiated North American Free Trade…

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: NAFTA isn’t a free trade agreement. The agreement’s restrictions are harmful from a free-trade perspective.

REASONING: Adam Smith said that restrictions on the movement of things or people restrict free trade. There are still restrictions on people under NAFTA, so there is no free trade.

ANALYSIS: This is partly a bad argument, and partly a good argument. It doesn’t say whether NAFTA made trade more or less free. If NAFTA decreased restrictions on goods and labor then its hard to say NAFTA harmed free trade.

However, the argument is correct that NAFTA doesn’t guarantee free trade in North America.

The method of the argument is to make an appeal to a principled authority (Adam Smith).

___________

1. Alternative? The argument is just attacking NAFTA. No alternatives are mentioned, and the argument didn’t reach it’s conclusion by eliminating all competing conclusions.
2. Which term? Everyone seems clearly used. The argument defines free trade, and uses it consistently.
3. The argument implies that the restrictions on labor are representative of NAFTA as a whole.
4. CORRECT. Adam Smith invented the idea of free trade, so he’s certainly relevant. The argument uses his ideas to argue against NAFTA.
5. There was no issue posed. The author isn’t responding to anyone, or refuting an argument. He just blabbers on about why NAFTA is bad, without having been asked.

Recap: The question begins with “The recently negotiated North American Free Trade”. It is a Method of Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Method of Reasoning questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.