QUESTION TEXT: Conservationist: The risk to airplane passengers from…
QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning
CONCLUSION: The pilot concludes that the conservationist is being misleading.
REASONING: Most of the collisions have happened in the past couple of years. And the number of birds is increasing steadily.
ANALYSIS: The pilot makes a good point. His method of argument is to provide context. The recent increase in collisions sounds worrisome. Now the conservationist’s argument seems misleading.
- CORRECT. The pilot added context. The conservationist should have mentioned that the number of collisions has increased markedly in the past couple of years.
- The pilot didn’t say why he thought the conservationist was being misleading.
- The pilot is talking about this particular situation involving bird collisions. He isn’t making a statement about whether all situations, everywhere, always become more dangerous. That’s sort of extreme.
- The pilot only made a comment about the effects of the wildlife reserve. He didn’t mention its morality or why it existed.
- The pilot agrees that the figures were accurate. But he thinks that the way the conservationist presented them was misleading.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions