LSAT 153 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q6

LR Question 6 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: The best way to increase the blood supply in the city of Pulaski…

QUESTION TYPE: Weaken

CONCLUSION: Encouraging regular blood donors to donate more often is the best way of increasing Pulaski’s blood supply.

REASONING: A study in Moorestown and Fredricksburg found more success in convincing regular donors to donate more than new or sporadic donors.

ANALYSIS: In order to weaken this argument, we are looking for something that makes it so that encouraging regular donors is not the right way to go. For example, the right answer might cause us to doubt the validity of the study or that the results of the study can be translated to Pulaski.

___________

1. This information supports the idea that encouraging regular donors produces more increase. This strengthens the argument instead of weakening it.
2. The differences in proportion of frequent donors is not relevant in determining who we should target to increase blood supply.
3. This only further suggests that encouraging regular blood donors leads to higher blood supply, which does the opposite of weakening the argument.
4. Since we know from the stimulus that sporadic donors are unlikely to give blood more often, this does not weaken the argument. It may still be possible that encouraging regulars will increase blood supply by more than encouraging the sporadic donors, despite the larger numbers.
5. CORRECT. If this is true, then it means that trying to convince regular blood donors to donate more will be pointless, since it is impossible for them to safely give more. Therefore, this undermines the conclusion that encouraging regular donors to give more is the best way to increase blood supply.

Recap: The question begins with “The best way to increase the blood supply in the city of Pulaski”. It is a Weaken question. Learn more about LSAT Weaken questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.