LSAT 120 – Section 4 – Question 23

LSAT 120 - Section 4 - Question 23

October 2005

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:02

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT120 S4 Q23
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Math +Math
A
1%
155
B
55%
164
C
13%
156
D
10%
159
E
21%
161
146
159
173
 +Harder 146.628 +SubsectionMedium

A television manufacturing plant has a total of 1,000 workers, though an average of 10 are absent on any given day for various reasons. On days when exactly 10 workers are absent, the plant produces televisions at its normal rate. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the plant could fire 10 workers without any loss in production.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the manufacturing plant could fire 10 of its 1000 workers without any loss in production. Why? Because an average of 10 workers are usually absent anyway. And, when 10 workers are absent, production continues at the usual rate.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author notes that 10 workers are usually absent on any given day. However, he fails to establish that it’s the same 10 people every day. Quite possibly, which workers are absent varies from day to day.
If so, firing 10 workers would decrease the manufacturing plant’s workforce. In addition to lacking the absentee workers, the plant would now lack the fired workers. And thus production might decrease.

A
ignores the possibility that if 10 workers were fired, each of the remaining workers would produce more televisions than previously
If the remaining workers produced more televisions, production would not go down—which would strengthen the author’s conclusion. So this can’t be the flaw.
B
fails to show that the absentee rate would drop if 10 workers were fired
The author’s conclusion requires the absentee rate to drop after the firings—but he doesn’t show that it would. Suppose the absentee rate stayed the same among the remaining workers. The workforce would then be missing both the absentee workers and the fired workers.
C
takes for granted that the normal rate of production can be attained only when no more than the average number of workers are absent
The author doesn’t presume that the normal rate of production can only be attained if the average number of workers or fewer are absent. He merely says that it is in fact attained when that number is absent.
D
overlooks the possibility that certain workers are crucial to the production of televisions
We have no specific reason to believe that the author overlooks this—unlike the flaw in (B).
E
takes for granted that the rate of production is not affected by the number of workers employed at the plant
This goes far beyond what the author is arguing: it would mean that even reducing the number of workers by 80% would not affect the rate of production! The author is only contending that the loss of 10 workers wouldn’t affect production.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 120 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply