QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Strengthen
1. The government claims that the nuclear industry poses no risk of accident.
2. Yet the government is limiting the nuclear industry’s liability in case of accident.
3. Therefore there is a risk of accident and the public is correct to be worried.
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.
- The government claimed that the power plants were safe, not unsafe.
- No one controls the event of an accident and no one stands to benefit financially. The nuclear industry only stands to lose financially.
- This would show that the limited liability might harm the public if we already knew the reactor was unsafe. But we don’t. The reactors might well be safe whether or not the nuclear industry has a financial interest in them staying safe.
- CORRECT. The government doesn’t act unless there is a danger. Since the government did act, then there is a danger. This means the government sometimes lies, since they say there is no danger.
- This doesn’t tell us if a danger actually exists.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly