QUESTION TYPE: Must be True
CONCLUSION: There is a risk of accident and the public is correct to be worried.
REASONING: The government claims that the nuclear industry poses no risk of accident.
Yet the government is limiting the nuclear industry’s liability in case of accident.
ANALYSIS: The editor’s argument is not quite good. It could be that there is no risk and so unlimited liability won’t affect anything. Governments sometimes have useless programs.
So the editor could be right but it could also be the case that there is no risk and the liability insurance is useless.
- This could be true but doesn’t have to be true. It could be the plants are safe and the liability waiver is worthless.
- CORRECT. Either the plants are safe or they aren’t. The government says they are safe but is acting as if they aren’t (by limiting liability.)
- It could be that the government is not lying about its reasons (protecting the industry.) That would just mean that the government is lying about safety instead.
- This would only be true if there is no risk of accident. But if there is a risk of accident then unlimited liability does threaten the nuclear industry.
- Heck no. People are at risk too.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly