Logical reasoning PrepTest 125 · Section 4 · Question 2

Incorrect. Kris doesn't cite a source for any information in her argument, and Terry doesn't bring up any sources she uses, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. If anything, Terry agrees with Kris on the negative effects of chemical pollution but disagrees on the accuracy of her assessment of the negative effects of noise pollution from cell phones.

Incorrect. Kris believes that the different types of pollution cause harm, and Terry is aligned with that (at least for chemical pollution).

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
K: Chemical companies claimed pollution was required for progress, but we regulated them to stop that. Cell phones cause noise pollution, so they should be regulated, as well.

T: Chemical pollution makes you sick. Cell phone pollution makes you annoyed. Your argument is ridiculous.

Answer Anticipation:
When dealing with a Methods of Reasoning question, you should always be on the lookout for elements that are commonly used to form arguments. Here, Kris starts off with an analogy, comparing chemical pollution from chemical plants to noise pollution from cell phones. She concludes that since one was regulated (chemical industry), the other should be regulated, as well. In other words, she relies on similarities to draw a conclusion that two things should be treated similarly.

Terry's starts by calling Kris's argument absurd. How does he reach that conclusion? By pointing out a key difference between chemical and noise pollution. So Terry's response points out a key difference to attack Kris's argument based on similarities.

Answer Explanation:
By pointing out a key difference between the two elements in Kris's analogy, Terry questions how strong of an analogy it is. Since analogies are always between two different things, there are always similarities and differences. The more similar the two analogous things/situations are, the stronger; the more different, the weaker. This is the correct answer because it highlights how the analogy is more different than Kris thinks.

Key Takeaway:
Comparative logic is common on the LSAT, and analogies are a common subset of comparisons. Be on the lookout for them, because when one is present, it's almost always relevant in finding the correct answer.

Incorrect. Terry doesn't address technological progress at all, instead focusing on the supposed harm caused by the two advances.