LSAT 146 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q7

LR Question 7 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Editorialist: The city council is considering increasing…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Increasing airport traffic beyond design capacity will reduce safety.

REASONING: Thirty years ago, airports tried this. Safety was reduced every time, despite use of the latest technology.

ANALYSIS: This sounds like a pretty good argument. Except….It’s been thirty years. It’s possible that the current latest technology now is much better than the technology that existed thirty years ago. So it’s possible it’s now safe to move beyond design capacity.

It’s common sense that, in our society, technology improves with time. The newest LSATs require you to use such common knowledge to make hypotheses.

___________

1. This is a different flaw.
    
   Example of flaw: Every accountant I’ve worked with has been from Chicago. So all accountants worldwide must be from Chicago.
2. CORRECT. This describes the flaw. “Latest technology” is a sort of pronoun reference. What we really care about is the technology itself, not whether it’s the “latest”. It’s possible that the current “latest technology” is significantly better than the “latest technology” that existed 30 years ago. In which case the studies are invalid.
3. It doesn’t matter what council members know about the studies. They might be aware of the studies, but disagree with them. Or not.
    
   Awareness itself isn’t necessarily a relevant factor. It’s what people do with knowledge that matters.
4. This is a different flaw. The editorialist isn’t relying on a mere absence of evidence: they have prior studies that show the plan may be dangerous.
    
   Example of flaw: Editorialist: Council members have no proof the plan is safe. So the plan must be unsafe.
5. This isn’t relevant. The council members claimed the plan would not decrease safety. The argument is only about that claim – it’s not about whether there are benefits to the plan.