LSAT 3 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q5

LR Question 5 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Observatory director: Some say that funding the megatelescope…

QUESTION TYPE: Weaken

ANALYSIS: The argument attempts to prove that the telescope is worthy of funding because it could have indirect benefits. It cites the work of famous scientists whose research benefited all of society.

The problem is: are these astronomers as brilliant as the famous scientists? Perhaps their work is highly unlikely to benefit society.

___________

1. This is not an appeal to authority. It mentions experts, but it does not claim that Einstein believes this telescope is a good idea.
2. This is sometimes a problem in journalism but it is not a problem here. The stimulus provides a general argument that could be used against anyone who made the claim that the megatelescope would benefit only the astronomers.
3. The stimulus didn’t even name the opponents. It’s hard to personally attack someone you don’t name.
4. It seems clear that the stimulus is talking about economic benefits in both cases. Astronomers benefit from having jobs and the world benefited economically from technology such as the radio.
5. CORRECT. Yes. There are many scientists and most of them aren’t like Einstein.

Recap: The question begins with “Observatory director: Some say that funding the megatelescope”. It is a Weaken question. Learn how to master LSAT Weaken questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.