LSAT 32, Logical Reasoning II, Q8, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Which one of the following principles, if…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Strengthen

CONCLUSION: We should allow development.

REASONING: Figorian wetland development might not affect wildlife and it is necessary for growth. We have conserved wetlands so far.

ANALYSIS: All of the wrong answer choices actually weaken the idea that we can develop. 

The right answer can be a little hard to understand. But it basically says that you can’t regulate until there is evidence of harm. We don’t have any evidence of harm in Figoria so it is too soon to regulate there. 

It’s a catch-22. We can’t have evidence of harm from development until development happens. That means there can never be enough evidence to prevent development until it is first allowed and it causes harm.

___________

1. This goes against the developer’s argument that they have a right to develop their country’s national resources.
2. This argues against development. There is a chance that development might affect wildlife.
3. CORRECT. So far we have no evidence that wetland development has hurt wildlife in Figoria. The reason we have no evidence is that no wetland development has taken place in Figoria. So it is premature to regulate. 
4. This shows that it doesn’t matter if Figoria has conserved wetlands so far. They don’t get any bonus points. This weakens the argument for development. 
5. This supports the idea of not developing. 

LawHub Order

LawHub Order

---