• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

LSAT Hacks

The Explanations That Should Have Come With The LSAT

  • Start Here
    • About
  • LSAT Explanations
  • LSAT Courses
  • Tutoring
    • Tutoring
    • Mastery seminars
    • Course
    • Books
  • Blog
  • Login
LSAT Explanations » LSAT Preptest 33 » Logical Reasoning 2 » Question 18

LSAT 33, Logical Reasoning II, Q18, LSATHacks

LSAT 33 Explanations

LR Question 18 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Studies have shown that photosynthesis, the process…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Industrial carbon dioxide pollution is purely beneficial to agriculture and to humanity.

REASONING: High levels of CO2 leads to more photosynthesis. Plants grow using photosynthesis.

ANALYSIS: The argument has listed a benefit for plants from CO2 production. But it hasn’t shown that there are no downsides that might outweigh the benefit. We know in real life that more CO2 probably leads to higher temperatures or shifts in weather patterns that can harm agriculture. 

The conclusion might be right. But the argument would have to examine potential downsides to be sure.

The structure is: a benefit is listed, and potential (and fairly obvious) downsides are not addressed. 

___________

  1. This is a bad argument. It makes the error of going to extremes. “If something is good, then even more of it must be even better!” The stimulus didn’t make this error. (it would have said: “therefore we should burn as much CO2 as we can to help agriculture”)
  2. CORRECT. This is the same structure. A benefit of exercise is listed. The argument concludes that exercise is therefore good. But any potential harms of exercise aren’t addressed. And it’s fairly obvious that exercise can lead to injury.The conclusion might be right. But the argument needs to examine potential downsides.
  3. This argument is ok. But it’s possible that we can avoid excess calorie consumption even without fasting. 
  4. This makes the same error as A. Just because one thing is better doesn’t mean we should completely eliminate the other thing. It might still be good, but in smaller quantities. 
  5. This appears to parallel the argument. However, this argument focusses on one negative effect and ignores known positives of penicillin. The argument focussed on one positive effect and ignored known negatives of CO2.

Previous Question
Table Of Contents
Next Question




Free Logical Reasoning lesson

Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

I created LSATHacks, and scored a 177 on the LSAT.

Check out LSATHacks All Access

It's your one stop shop for LSAT prep: 1000s more explanations, and courses for both intro and advanced students. Lifetime access to everything on LSATHacks and anything I add. Plus a consult with me to get you started on the right track.
---------
Socials and Updates: If you have any questions, you can can check out my TikTok videos or email me.

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

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Free LSAT Email Course

My best LSAT tips, straight to your inbox


New! LSATHacks All Access: Get every course on LSATHacks + members only explanations

LSATHacks Pro

Get a higher score with LSATHacks

LSAT Course, LSAT Mastery seminars, and 3,000 extra explanations. All for only $760 $349, satisfaction guaranteed. Sign up here: https://lsathacks.com/all-access/

Testimonials

Your emails are tremendously helpful. - Matt

Thanks for the tips! They were very helpful, and even make you feel like you studied a bit. Great insight and would love more! - Haj

Dear Graeme: MUCH MORE PLEASE!! Your explanations are very clear, and you give equal importance to why answers are WRONG, as well as why THE ANSWER is right!! Very well done. Thank you for all your efforts - Tom

These have been awesome. More please!!! - Caillie

The course was immensely helpful and has eased my nerves a lot. - Lovlean

© Copyright 2023 LSAT Hacks. All Rights Reserved. | FAQ/Legal

Disclaimer: Use of this site requires official LSAT preptests; the explanations are of no use without the preptests. If you do not have the accompanying preptests, you can find them here: LSAT preptests
LSAT is copyright of LSAC. LSAC does not review or endorse specific test preparation materials or services and has not reviewed this site.
×
Item Added to your Cart!
There are no products
Continue Shopping