PrepTest 107
[lcid:3524] Prep Test 107 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S1
Logical reasoning
Question prompt
Editorial: The government claims
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: D
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Argument or Facts
Argument
Valid or Flawed
Flawed
Question Type
Principle Questions / Strengthen Questions
Stimulus Summary
Government: Nuclear plants are safe, so people’s fears are overblown
Government action - Limit nuclear liability in case of accidents
Justification - Protect nuclear industry from bankruptcy
Liability threatens industry → Injury claims sustained
Injury claims sustained → Injuries caused by nuclear accident
Judgment - The Public’s fear is well-founded
Answer Anticipation
Principle (Strengthen) questions generally present a judgment in the conclusion, backed up by details in the premises. We should start with that judgment, identify what information the argument treats as sufficient to justify it, and then find an answer that connects them. And since we did a lot of work in understanding this argument for the last question, we can carry that information along here.
Looking at the Editorial’s argument, the conclusion’s judgment is that the public’s fears of injury from a nuclear accident are well-founded. Why does the Editorial believe that to be true? Because the government is acting as if there’s potential liability to the nuclear industry from such accidents.
So the Editorial concludes that fears are well-founded if the government is acting as if those fears could come true. Let’s find an answer connecting those concepts.
Answer choices
-
AIf the government claims Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
The government here claimed that something is safe, so this answer doesn’t apply. -
BFear that a certain Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Those who have control over whether a plant melts down are those running the plant, not the government. And even with the liability shield, the plant isn’t going to make money if it explodes - the shield will just prevent them from going bankrupt. This answer is incorrect, but it’s tempting because it so directly addresses the judgment in the conclusion! It just fails to connect it to the premises. -
CIf a potentially dangerous Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
The conclusion is about the public’s fear, not about what’s in the best interests of the public. The public could fear something that is in their best interest, and they could welcome something that’s actually quite dangerous! -
DThe government sometimes makes Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D matches the stem
This answer is a bit convoluted with how it works with the stimulus! However, let’s unpack it. First, the opening line is pivoted away from, so let’s skip that (it lines up with the government’s claim that the plants are safe). From there, it says that it doesn’t act to prevent situations unless there’s a chance they happen. What situation is the government acting to prevent? Nuclear bankruptcy due to financial liability for accidents. So, then, there must be a risk of such financial liability coming about. And the conditional premises establish that such liability exists only if there are injuries from a nuclear accident. So this answer guarantees that there’s a risk of liability, and the conditional premises guarantee that, therefore, there’s a risk of nuclear accident. If there’s a risk of nuclear accident, then the public’s fear of an accident is well-founded, justifying the conclusion. -
EIf a real financial Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
This answer justifies the government’s action, not the Editorial’s conclusion.
What this tests
Discussion
-
Correct answer 2 replies
Started by devon
-
Why D 1 reply
Started by irinajugovic1
-
Why D and not C ? 2 replies
Started by Maxx