LSAT 137 – Section 3 – Question 22

LSAT 137 - Section 3 - Question 22

October 2012

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:08

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
PT137 S3 Q22
+LR
+Exp
Necessary assumption +NA
Link Assumption +LinkA
Analogy +An
A
52%
167
B
12%
161
C
21%
161
D
2%
154
E
14%
160
155
163
172
 +Hardest 146.416 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

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

Consumer advocate: There is no doubt that the government is responsible for the increased cost of gasoline, because the government’s policies have significantly increased consumer demand for fuel, and as a result of increasing demand, the price of gasoline has risen steadily.

Summary
The author concludes that the government is responsible for the increase cost of gasoline.
Why?
Because the government’s policies have increased demand for fuel, and as a result of that increase demand, the price of gasoline has increased. (In other words, the government’s policies ultimately caused the price increase.)

Notable Assumptions
Is the government “responsible” for the increased cost, just because it enacted policies that led to that increased cost? Not necessarily — “responsible” in this context means something like fault or blame. But we don’t know that whoever caused the increased price must be at fault/blamed for it.
The author must assume that if the government’s policies caused the increased price of gas, then the government is responsible for the increased price.

A
The government can bear responsibility for that which it indirectly causes.
Necessary, because if it weren’t true — if the government CANNOT bear responsibility for that which it indirectly causes — then the conclusion would not follow from the premises. The premises establish that the government indirectly caused increased gas price. (It’s indirect because there was an intermediate cause — increased demand for fuel.) The author must assume that this indirect cause can result in the government bearing responsibility.
B
The government is responsible for some unforeseen consequences of its policies.
Not necessary, because we don’t know whether any of the consequences of the government’s policies were “unforeseen.” It might be that the government completely foresaw the increased gas price that would result from its policies.
C
Consumer demand for gasoline cannot increase without causing gasoline prices to increase.
Not necessary, because the argument concerns only a single instance in which consumer demand for fuel resulted in increased gas price. The argument concerns responsibility for that particular past phenomenon. But the author doesn’t have to assume anything universal about what consumer demand for gas always leads to.
D
The government has an obligation to ensure that demand for fuel does not increase excessively.
Not necessary, because what the government is obligated to do (what it should or should not do) is a separate issue from what the government is responsible for.
E
If the government pursues policies that do not increase the demand for fuel, gasoline prices tend to remain stable.
Not necessary, because the argument concerns a situation in which government policies did result in increased demand for fuel. What would have happened if the policies did not increase demand for fuel is not something that affects the reasoning of the argument.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 137 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply