Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardAssumptions in Causal Arguments

Ten years ago, the government of Valoria eliminated all tariffs on imported industrial machinery. In the decade since this policy change, Valoria's domestic manufacturing output has grown by 50 percent, and the average age of the industrial machinery used in Valorian factories has decreased by exactly five years. Economists have concluded that the tariff elimination caused the surge in manufacturing output by enabling factories to affordably replace outdated equipment with newer, more efficient imported machinery. Which one of the following is an assumption required by the economists' argument?

  1. A
    Without the elimination of the tariffs on imported machinery, Valoria's domestic manufacturing output would not have experienced any growth.
  2. B
    The imported industrial machinery acquired by Valorian factories is significantly more efficient than any machinery that could have been produced domestically.
  3. C
    The Valorian government did not eliminate the tariffs specifically because officials anticipated an imminent surge in domestic manufacturing output.
  4. The decrease in the average age of industrial machinery in Valoria was not primarily the result of older factories with aging equipment permanently shutting down.Answer
  5. E
    The total number of manufacturing facilities currently operating in Valoria is greater than the number of facilities operating ten years ago.

Answer

The assumption regarding the decrease in the average age of machinery not being primarily caused by older factories shutting down.
The argument uses the statistic that the average age of machinery decreased as evidence that factories actually bought new machinery. However, an average can decrease in two ways: adding new, young data points (buying new machines), or removing old data points (old factories shutting down). For the economists' causal mechanism to work, they must assume the statistical drop wasn't just a mathematical illusion caused by survivorship bias. If older factories simply went out of business, the average age of machines in the surviving factories drops without anyone buying a single new machine, destroying the argument's core mechanism.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the causal relationship proposed in the conclusion.
Cause: Tariff elimination. Mechanism: Factories replacing old equipment with new imports. Effect: 50% growth in output.
Understanding the exact causal chain is necessary to identify vulnerabilities in the reasoning.
2
Evaluate the evidence provided to support the mechanism.
The evidence for 'replacing old equipment' is a statistical decrease in the average age of machinery across Valorian factories.
Statistical averages can often be misleading and are a common source of logical gaps in LSAT arguments.
3
Apply the Negation Test to evaluate potential necessary assumptions.
Negating the correct option yields: 'The decrease in average age WAS primarily the result of older factories shutting down.'
If an option is a necessary assumption, its logical negation will destroy the argument.
4
Assess the impact of the negated statement on the argument.
If the average age dropped solely because old factories closed (removing old machines from the data pool), it means the remaining factories didn't necessarily buy new machines. The proposed causal mechanism completely fails.
This confirms the statement is absolutely required for the argument to hold.

Key Concept

Eliminating Alternate Explanations for Statistical Evidence (Defender Assumption)
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Assumptions in Causal Arguments

More questions from this topic