LSAT 33, Logical Reasoning II, Q15, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Scientists hoping to understand and eventually reverse…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: It was wrong to use a spacecraft to try and fix the ozone layer.

REASONING: The spacecraft did as much damage to the ozone layer as would a year’s pollution from an average factory. And it is wrong for a factory to damage the ozone layer.

ANALYSIS: This is a bad argument. The use of the spacecraft might be justifiable because it helped complete crucial experiments to help fix the ozone layer. A factory does nothing to help the ozone layer.

___________

1. CORRECT. The spacecraft will help the ozone layer in the long run. The factory just hurts it more in the long run. 
2. The environmentalists did not generalize. They just said that this particular use of a spacecraft was wrong. They didn’t say that all space missions or all experiments were wrong.
3. This is an important distinction but it isn’t relevant here. The environmentalists didn’t mention reversing harm. They only claimed that spacecraft trips increase harm.
4. Actually the two quantities are directly comparable: the experiments did as much damage as one year of factory emissions.
5. The environmentalists only thought that these particular experiments did harm. They weren’t generalizing. 

LawHub Order

LawHub Order

---