LSAT 30, Logical Reasoning I, Q7, LSATHacks

LR Question 7 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: The drilling proponent's reply to the drilling…

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: The drilling proponent concludes that the opponent’s proposal is ridiculous.

REASONING: He makes an analogy to farms. Each individual farm does not provide very much food compared to the needs of the nation as a whole. Yet collectively the farms are valuable. So too with oil production.

ANALYSIS: The proponent makes use of an analogy. However he ignores the environmental aspect of the opponent’s argument. A single farm doesn’t usually pose a major environmental threat. 

___________

1. The proponent offers no evidence. They respond with an analogy.
2. The proponent didn’t disagree with the statistics. They just disagreed with how to interpret them.
3. The proponent didn’t argue with the opponent’s technique or claim that the technique was legitimate in other circumstances.
4. CORRECT. The proponent claims his analogy is parallel. The analogy’s conclusion is obviously wrong. The proponents hopes to use that to show that the opponent’s conclusion is also wrong. 
5. The drilling opponent’s evidence doesn’t support the proponent’s conclusion. The opponent’s evidence includes the risk of environmental harm. 

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.