PrepTest 141

Incorrect. Winona doesn't question whether space research will lead to technological advancement, instead saying that if that's the goal it should be funded directly.

Incorrect. Winona doesn't raise evidence—she raises an argument around the logic behind Inez's argument.

Incorrect. Winona doesn't call out Inez's argument as contradictory but rather absurd.

Incorrect. Winona doesn't mention the expense, so this answer is out of scope.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
I: Space research leads to technological advancements, so it should continue to be funded.

W: If we want those advances, we should fund them directly, so your justification for space spending is absurd.

Answer Anticipation:
Winona highlights a goal of Inez's argument—technological advances—and highlights that the method she says will achieve them—funding space research—isn't the best way to go about doing it. If you want those advances, you should fund them directly. The correct answer should highlight this shift in methods to achieve a goal.

Answer Explanation:
This answer reflects Winona's argument that the goal Inez mentions—technological advances—could be achieved by funding them directly instead of indirectly through the space program.

Key Takeaway:
We see another LSAT question that ends up revolving around goals and methods of achieving them! When you can contextualize an argument through that frame, there's a good chance that you'll be closer to the correct answer by doing so.