LSAT 125 – Section 4 – Question 02

LSAT 125 - Section 4 - Question 02

June 2008

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:50

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
PT125 S4 Q02
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
Analogy +An
A
1%
153
B
2%
152
C
1%
152
D
95%
163
E
1%
151
131
138
145
 +Easier 145.982 +SubsectionMedium

Kris: Years ago, the chemical industry claimed that technological progress cannot occur without pollution. Today, in the name of technological progress, the cellular phone industry manufactures and promotes a product that causes environmental pollution in the form of ringing phones and loud conversations in public places. Clearly, the cellular industry must be regulated, just as the chemical industry is now regulated.

Terry: That’s absurd. Chemical pollution can cause physical harm, but the worst harm that cellular phones can cause is annoyance.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Terry concludes that Kris is “absurd” to claim that the cellular industry must be regulated the same way as the chemical industry because they both produce a form of pollution. Terry supports this position by claiming that chemical pollution is more harmful than the noise pollution produced by cell phones.

Describe Method of Reasoning
Terry counters Kris’s argument by rejecting Kris’s analogy. Kris claims that two industries should be similarly regulated by analogizing their harmful consequences, and Terry counters by claiming that the harms presented by Kris as analogous are very different in severity.

A
questioning the reliability of the source of crucial information in Kris’s argument
Terry doesn’t question the reliability of Kris’s information sources. All Terry questions is Kris’s use of an analogy.
B
attacking the accuracy of the evidence about the chemical industry that Kris puts forward
Terry doesn’t claim that Kris is making any false claims about the chemical industry, only that the analogy Kris makes between the chemical and cellular industries is weak.
C
arguing that an alleged cause of a problem is actually an effect of that problem
Terry doesn’t make any arguments against Kris based on wrong causality.
D
questioning the strength of the analogy on which Kris’s argument is based
By denying that the harms of chemicals are comparable to the harms of cell phones, Terry questions the strength of the analogy that Kris uses to support the argument that chemicals and cell phones should be similarly regulated.
E
rejecting Kris’s interpretation of the term “technological progress”
Terry does not reject Kris’s interpretation of the term “technological progress,” or even discuss it at all.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 125 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply