PrepTest 107

[lcid:3527] Prep Test 107 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Plant Manager: We could Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed/Flawed

Question Type

Errors in Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

PM: A new process pollutes less, but the equipment is expensive and so is running the process, so it’ll cost a lot but not make money.
S: Yes, but one of your facts is wrong - the new process is fuel-efficient.

Answer Anticipation

We’ve moved from a Point at Issue question to an Errors in Reasoning question, asking specifically about the first speaker’s argument.That means we can ignore what the second speaker says!
This stimulus falls into a common pattern - it compares the pros and cons of two options. While this normally leads to a conclusion that is a recommendation, this one falls short of that, instead reaching a conclusion just about the comparative economics of the new process and the old one.
So let’s start with that conclusion - adopting the new process will cost a lot but bring the company no profit. So it’s a determination of the overall economics of the new process.
In order to reach that conclusion, the argument would need to compare all the costs and benefits of both processes. But it falls short of doing so. It looks at the cost of the new equipment to buy and install, but it doesn’t talk about the upkeep cost of the new and old equipment. It talks about the cost to reheat the copper when discussing operating costs, but it doesn’t talk about other operating costs (e.g., fuel, personnel, safety, even environmental).
In short, it draws a conclusion about the net economic benefit of a change without looking at all aspects of that change. Let’s find an answer reflecting that.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The overall conclusion is Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    This answer reflects the flaw we identified in the argument. The conclusion is about the net economic benefit to the company from switching to the new process. However, it considers only some of the costs of the two processes. In failing to consider all relevant costs and economic benefits, the argument falls short of supporting its conclusion, so this is the correct answer.
  2. B
    The support for the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    The Plant Manager says more than, “Because I say so!” He goes into some of the costs and benefits of the new process - and those would be independently verifiable.
  3. C
    The overall conclusion reached Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    The conclusion speaks to individual costs and benefits of the new process compared to the old, but it draws a conclusion about the net cost/benefit. That’s different, so this argument isn’t Circular.
  4. D
    Evidence that is taken Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    The Plant Manager’s premises are all certain - there’s no “probably,” “likely,” or other words denoting probability rather than certainty. This argument thus doesn’t commit a Weak Premise flaw.
  5. E
    Facts that are not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    The Plant Manager discusses economic costs and benefits of switching to a new process to support a conclusion about the net profitability of the new process. Those premises are absolutely relevant to the conclusion!

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion