LSAT 3 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q8

LR Question 8 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: On the basis of incontestable proof that car safety seats…

QUESTION TYPE: Paradox

ANALYSIS: Remember that the stimulus is talking specifically about accidents where children were in safety seats. The children continued to receive serious injuries despite being in the seats.

A lot of the wrong answer choices talk about the seats not being used.

___________

1. This wouldn’t explain why children in safety seats are getting hurt.
2. Yet the safety seats are supposedly to greatly reduce the number of injuries. More trips might cause an uptick in accidents. Yet unless the increase in trips was massive it shouldn’t matter much.
3. So? There are children in safety seats who are getting hurt. We don’t care about kids who don’t have seats.
4. The stimulus already admits that injuries were only reduced and not eliminated. The problem is we have many more injuries than we expected.
5. CORRECT. If you’re upside down in a safety seat (for example) then it probably won’t help you.

Recap: The question begins with “On the basis of incontestable proof that car safety seats”. It is a Paradox question. Learn more about LSAT Paradox questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.