Argument Evaluation

289 questions

Question 121Question →

Sociologist: Analysts argue that corporate "right to disconnect" policies cause employee anxiety by compressing workloads into fewer hours. They cite a survey showing employees at companies with these policies report significantly higher anxiety than those at companies without them. These analysts are mistaken. The survey data reveals these policies were adopted almost exclusively by companies in the notoriously high-stress financial sector. Therefore, the elevated anxiety levels reported by employees subject to these policies are attributable to the demanding nature of their industry, not to the policies themselves.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the sociologist's argument depends?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The "right to disconnect" policies do not independently exacerbate the anxiety experienced by the financial sector employees surveyed.

Answer

The statement that the 'right to disconnect' policies do not independently exacerbate the anxiety experienced by the financial sector employees surveyed.
The author concludes that the higher anxiety is caused by the industry and NOT the policies. For this causal conclusion to hold, the author must assume that the policies themselves are not contributing to the problem. If we negate this assumption (i.e., imagine that the policies DO independently exacerbate the anxiety), then the higher anxiety levels would be at least partially attributable to the policies. This would completely destroy the author's conclusion, confirming that the statement is a logically necessary assumption.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the elevated anxiety levels reported in the survey are attributable to the demanding nature of the financial industry, not to the communication policies.
Evaluating an assumption requires knowing exactly what claim the author is attempting to prove.
2
Identify the premise used to support the conclusion.
The primary premise is that the companies with these policies in the survey are almost exclusively in the high-stress financial sector.
Understanding the evidence reveals the logical gap between what is stated and what is concluded.
3
Analyze the logical gap (the flaw in the reasoning).
The author assumes that because an alternative cause (the high-stress industry) is present, the original proposed cause (the policies) must have absolutely no effect.
Just because the industry is high-stress does not automatically mean the policies couldn't be making the anxiety even worse.
4
Apply the Negation Test to the choices to find the necessary assumption.
Negating the correct choice yields: 'The policies DO independently exacerbate the anxiety.' This directly falsifies the conclusion that the policies are not to blame, proving it is a necessary assumption.
The Negation Test is the definitive logical tool for isolating an assumption upon which an argument depends.

Key Concept

Identifying Defender Assumptions in Causal Arguments
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 122Question →

City Planner: To reduce traffic congestion in our downtown area, we must implement a new zoning policy that restricts the construction of new commercial office buildings exclusively to the city's periphery. Since the majority of downtown traffic is generated by commuters traveling to and from office buildings, limiting new offices downtown will naturally halt the increase in traffic. Furthermore, this policy will eventually lead to a significant reduction in overall downtown traffic as older downtown office buildings are repurposed for other uses.

Which of the following are necessary assumptions on which the city planner's argument depends? (Select all that apply)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The repurposing of older downtown office buildings will not result in new venues that attract significantly more vehicle traffic than those buildings did when functioning as offices.; The volume of downtown traffic generated by non-office destinations will not increase at a rate that completely offsets the reductions gained by restricting new office construction.

Answer

The correct answers are the options stating that repurposed buildings will not attract significantly more traffic than the original offices, and that non-office traffic will not increase enough to offset the reductions.
Both correct options pass the Negation Technique. If repurposed buildings attract significantly more traffic than the original offices, the argument's prediction of a traffic reduction fails. Similarly, if non-office traffic increases enough to offset the office traffic reductions, the prediction that traffic increases will halt is invalidated. Therefore, the argument logically depends on both of these defensive assumptions.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is twofold: limiting new offices downtown will halt the increase in traffic, and repurposing older buildings will eventually lead to a significant reduction in traffic.
Understanding the exact scope of the conclusion is required to identify what must be assumed for it to hold.
2
Identify the premises supporting this conclusion.
The premises are that most downtown traffic comes from office commuters, and the new policy restricts new offices to the periphery.
Assumptions bridge the gap between premises and the conclusion, or defend the argument against potential vulnerabilities.
3
Apply the Negation Technique to evaluate candidate assumptions.
Logically negate each choice. If the negated version destroys the argument, the original statement is a necessary assumption.
The Negation Technique is the definitive test for necessary assumption questions.

Key Concept

Identifying necessary assumptions using the Negation Technique to defend against alternate causes or counterproductive outcomes.
Question 123Question →

Bilinguals consistently exhibit enhanced executive function compared to monolinguals. Many cognitive scientists attribute this to the continuous mental suppression of a secondary language. However, a recent study demonstrates that monolingual individuals who frequently engage in complex strategic board games exhibit a comparable degree of executive function enhancement to lifelong bilinguals. This clearly demonstrates that the constant suppression of a secondary language is not the primary mechanism responsible for the executive function advantage observed in bilingual individuals.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The enhanced executive function observed in bilingual individuals does not arise from a primary causal mechanism that is fundamentally distinct from the mechanism operating in monolingual board gamers.

Answer

The enhanced executive function observed in bilingual individuals does not arise from a primary causal mechanism that is fundamentally distinct from the mechanism operating in monolingual board gamers.
The argument concludes that language suppression is not the primary mechanism for bilinguals' enhanced executive function, based solely on the evidence that monolingual board gamers achieve a comparable enhancement through a different activity. This reasoning assumes that the two groups must be achieving their cognitive enhancements via the same underlying mechanism. If we apply the Negation Test and assume that the primary mechanisms for the two groups ARE fundamentally distinct, the fact that monolinguals get the advantage from board games tells us absolutely nothing about how bilinguals get the advantage. Under those conditions, the argument's conclusion loses all of its supporting evidence and collapses.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core argument structure.
Premise: Monolinguals who play strategic board games achieve the same executive function advantage as bilinguals. Conclusion: Therefore, secondary language suppression is not the primary mechanism for the bilinguals' advantage.
Understanding the premise-to-conclusion link is the essential first step in evaluating the argument's logic.
2
Identify the logical gap.
The author assumes that because a different activity produces the effect in Group B, the originally hypothesized cause must not be the operating mechanism in Group A.
Arguments that use causal evidence from one group to dismiss a cause in another group inherently assume structural similarities between the two groups.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the most likely answer choices.
Negating the correct option yields: 'The executive function advantage in bilinguals DOES arise from a fundamentally distinct mechanism than the one in board gamers.'
The Negation Test is the definitive logical tool for verifying Necessary Assumptions.
4
Evaluate the impact of the negated statement on the stimulus argument.
If the two groups utilize distinct causal mechanisms, the board gamer evidence is rendered completely irrelevant to the bilinguals, destroying the author's conclusion.
A necessary assumption, when logically negated, must cause the argument to collapse.

Key Concept

Necessary Assumption (Bridging Gap / Negation Test)
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 124Question →

City Planner: In order to significantly reduce the severe traffic congestion in our downtown commercial district, the municipal government should construct a new high-capacity bypass highway on the western outskirts of the city. Recent engineering studies demonstrate that this proposed bypass highway is designed to handle up to 20,000 vehicles per day. This capacity perfectly matches the estimated volume of excess commuter traffic that is currently clogging the main downtown routes during peak hours.

Statement: To properly evaluate the city planner's argument, it is necessary to determine whether the commuters currently traveling through the downtown district would actually choose to alter their routes to use the new western bypass highway.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True
The statement accurately identifies the crux of the argument. The city planner assumes that because the road can hold the cars, the cars will drive on it. Knowing whether commuters will actually change their driving habits is essential to evaluating if the plan to reduce congestion will succeed.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that building the western bypass highway will significantly reduce downtown traffic congestion.
Evaluating an argument requires first isolating the main claim or proposed plan.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The premises state that the bypass can handle 20,000 vehicles daily, which equals the current excess downtown traffic volume.
Understanding the evidence is necessary to see how the author attempts to support the conclusion.
3
Identify the logical gap or assumption.
The argument assumes that having the capacity for 20,000 vehicles means 20,000 vehicles will actually use it instead of their current route.
Arguments often rely on unstated assumptions that bridge the gap between the evidence and the conclusion.
4
Apply the Variance Test to the provided statement.
If commuters do alter their routes (Yes), the argument is strengthened. If they refuse to alter their routes (No), the argument falls apart. Thus, the statement is true.
The Variance Test definitively identifies whether a piece of information is critical for evaluating the argument.

Key Concept

Applying the Variance Test to identify the core assumption of a proposed plan.
Question 125Question →

City official: The newly constructed eastern bypass road will significantly reduce the severe traffic congestion currently experienced on Main Street. This is because the bypass will finally provide a more direct, faster route for heavy commercial trucks traveling between the industrial park and the interstate highway, meaning these vehicles will no longer need to drive through the city center.

The city official's argument relies on the assumption that commercial trucks currently contribute to the traffic congestion on Main Street.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True. The argument necessarily relies on this assumption.
The proposed statement is indeed a necessary assumption for the argument. The argument leaps from the premise that trucks will be removed from Main Street to the conclusion that congestion will be significantly reduced. For this reasoning to work, it is absolutely necessary that those trucks were a contributing factor to the congestion in the first place. If we negate the statement (assume trucks do NOT contribute to the congestion), the conclusion that removing them will reduce congestion falls apart. Therefore, the argument depends on this assumption.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the new bypass road will significantly reduce traffic congestion on Main Street.
Understanding the main point is required to evaluate what must be true for the argument's outcome to hold.
2
Identify the supporting premise.
The premise is that commercial trucks will use the new bypass instead of driving through the city center.
The premise provides the specific evidence or mechanism meant to guarantee the conclusion.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the proposed assumption.
Negated assumption: Commercial trucks do NOT currently contribute to the traffic congestion on Main Street.
The Negation Test is the definitive method to determine if an assumption is strictly necessary.
4
Evaluate the impact of the negated assumption on the argument's logic.
If trucks do not contribute to the congestion, then removing them will not significantly reduce the congestion, which completely destroys the conclusion.
Because negating the statement destroys the argument, the statement is a logically necessary assumption.

Key Concept

Applying the Negation Test to identify necessary bridge assumptions between premises and conclusions.
Question 126Question →

Botanist: Ghost orchid seeds require a specific soil fungus to germinate. In Silverwood Forest, this fungus is found exclusively in the decomposing bark of fallen elder-pine trees. Therefore, the new forest management policy, which mandates the removal of all fallen elder-pine trees from Silverwood to reduce wildfire risk, will inevitably cause the forest's ghost orchid population to decline.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the botanist's argument depends?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The ghost orchid population in Silverwood Forest cannot maintain its current numbers solely through reproductive methods that do not involve seed germination.

Answer

The ghost orchid population in Silverwood Forest cannot maintain its current numbers solely through reproductive methods that do not involve seed germination.
The argument concludes that removing fallen elder-pine trees will inevitably cause the ghost orchid population to decline. This relies on the premise that the seeds require a fungus found only on these fallen trees. However, if the orchids can reproduce effectively without seeds (e.g., vegetatively), the population might not decline. Therefore, the argument must assume that the orchids cannot maintain their numbers solely through non-seed methods.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion and premises of the argument.
Conclusion: The policy to remove fallen elder-pine trees will inevitably cause the ghost orchid population to decline. Premises: Ghost orchid seeds require a specific fungus to germinate, and this fungus is found exclusively on the decomposing bark of fallen elder-pine trees.
Deconstructing the argument structure is the essential first step in identifying any logical gaps.
2
Find the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises establish that seed germination will be halted. The conclusion claims the entire population will inevitably decline. The gap is the assumption that seed germination is strictly necessary to maintain the population size.
A valid argument must have no gaps between the provided evidence and the final claim.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the potential assumption.
Negating the correct statement yields: 'The ghost orchid population CAN maintain its current numbers solely through reproductive methods that do not involve seed germination.' If this is true, the loss of seed germination would not cause a population decline, destroying the argument.
The Negation Test is the definitive way to prove if an assumption is truly necessary for an argument.

Key Concept

Necessary Assumption and the Negation Test
Question 127Question →

The new administrative software update reduces the time it takes for employees to process customer requests by 20 percent. Therefore, the company should mandate that all employees install the new software update immediately.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the reasoning above?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: A company should mandate the installation of any software update that reduces the time it takes to process customer requests.

Answer

The principle stating that a company should mandate the installation of any software update that reduces the time it takes to process customer requests.
The correct answer acts as a perfect logical bridge between the evidence and the conclusion. By stating that ANY software update reducing processing time should be mandated, it triggers directly off the stated premise to absolutely guarantee the conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's premise.
Premise: The new software update reduces the time it takes for employees to process customer requests.
Understanding the evidence provided is the first step in analyzing the argument structure.
2
Identify the argument's conclusion.
Conclusion: The company should mandate that all employees install the update immediately.
The conclusion is the destination that the premise must logically reach.
3
Identify the logical gap between the premise and the conclusion.
Gap: The argument assumes that simply because an update reduces processing time, the company is justified in mandating it.
To justify the conclusion, we need a rule that perfectly bridges this gap.
4
Select the conditional principle that connects the premise to the conclusion.
The correct principle must be: 'If an update reduces processing time (premise), then the company should mandate its installation (conclusion).'
This 'If Premise, then Conclusion' structure logically guarantees the outcome, fulfilling the 'Justify' question task.

Key Concept

Principle - Justify: Bridging Premise to Conclusion

Alternative Method

You can visualize this as a math equation: Premise + Principle = Conclusion. Here, (Reduces Time) + (If Reduces Time -> Mandate) = (Mandate).
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Question 128Question →

The university has announced that any student who completes the advanced research seminar will be awarded a special graduation commendation. Therefore, we can be certain that every student majoring in history will be awarded this special graduation commendation.

Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the argument's conclusion to be properly drawn?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Every student majoring in history completes the advanced research seminar.

Answer

The option stating that every student majoring in history completes the advanced research seminar.
The argument establishes a conditional rule in the premise: If a student takes the seminar, then they receive the commendation. The conclusion attempts to state: If a student is a history major, then they receive the commendation. To make this conclusion 100% logically valid, we must bridge the gap between being a history major and taking the seminar. The correct answer provides this exact bridge: If a student is a history major, then they take the seminar. This creates a perfect deductive chain.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's core premise and main conclusion.
Premise: Completing the seminar guarantees the commendation. Conclusion: Majoring in history guarantees the commendation.
Isolating the formal structure of the argument is necessary to spot the missing logical link.
2
Determine the gap in the reasoning.
The argument jumps from the condition of 'majoring in history' to the trigger of 'completing the seminar' without connecting them.
The conclusion introduces a new group (history majors) that must be directly linked to the premise's trigger condition (completing the seminar).
3
Formulate the missing sufficient assumption.
The required assumption is that all history majors complete the advanced research seminar.
If all history majors take the seminar, and taking the seminar guarantees the commendation, then all history majors are mathematically guaranteed to receive the commendation.

Key Concept

Sufficient Assumption (Formal Logic Bridge)
Question 129Question →

Industry Analyst: The widespread adoption of remote work over the last three years has caused a significant drop in the sales and profitability of formal business attire. Consequently, the recent decline in the overall profit margins of the retail clothing sector is a direct result of this transition to remote work.

For the analyst's conclusion to be properly drawn, it is necessary to assume that the transition to remote work did not generate a surge in casual clothing profits that completely offset the losses from formal business attire.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True
The statement accurately identifies a necessary assumption. By ruling out an offsetting factor (an increase in casual clothing profits), this 'defender' assumption protects the causal link between remote work and the overall sector decline.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core argument, distinguishing between the premise and the conclusion.
Premise: Remote work caused a drop in formal attire profits. Conclusion: The overall profit decline in the retail clothing sector is a direct result of remote work.
Understanding the structural relationship between the specific evidence provided and the broader claim is required.
2
Apply the Negation Test to the proposed assumption.
Negated assumption: The transition to remote work DID generate a surge in casual clothing profits that completely offset the losses from formal business attire.
A logically necessary assumption is one that, if proven false, destroys the argument's conclusion.
3
Evaluate the impact of the negated assumption on the conclusion.
If remote work's positive impact on casual clothing profits canceled out its negative impact on formal attire profits, then remote work cannot be the cause of the OVERALL decline in the sector's profit margins.
Since the negated assumption invalidates the conclusion, the original assumption is strictly necessary.

Key Concept

Applying the Negation Test to identify defender assumptions that rule out alternate causes or offsetting factors.
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Question 130Question →

Match each argumentative scenario with the universal principle that most helps to logically justify its conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

The new community center will provide a safe space for youth after school. Therefore, the town should fund its construction.
The proposed factory expansion will destroy a critical wetland habitat. Therefore, the environmental committee must veto the expansion.
The new crop variety requires significantly less water than traditional varieties. Therefore, the agricultural board should approve it for commercial farming.
The political candidate has a proven record of increasing voter turnout. Therefore, the political party ought to nominate her.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Each scenario must be matched with the principle that takes its specific premise as a sufficient condition to guarantee its specific conclusion.
In a Principle - Justify question, the correct principle functions as a sufficient premise that connects the specific evidence given to the specific conclusion drawn. By perfectly aligning the 'if' trigger of the principle with the scenario's premise, and the 'then' result of the principle with the scenario's conclusion, the argument becomes logically valid.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premise (the factual evidence) and the conclusion (the normative judgment or recommendation) in a given scenario.
Separation of the argument into 'Fact X is true' and 'Therefore, Action Y should happen'.
Justifying an argument requires understanding exactly what evidence is being used to support what claim.
2
Identify the logical gap between the premise and the conclusion.
Recognition that the scenario assumes, without stating, that Fact X is enough to require Action Y.
In Principle - Justify questions, arguments are formally invalid until a broad rule is applied to bridge the gap.
3
Select the principle that explicitly states 'If Fact X, then Action Y'.
The correct principle is matched to the scenario.
A sufficient principle guarantees the conclusion follows logically from the premises provided.

Key Concept

Principle - Justify
Question 131Question →

Match each argument below with the sufficient assumption that logically guarantees its conclusion. Note that one assumption provided is an incorrect trap.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

The proposed highway expansion will increase traffic flow. Thus, the expansion should be approved.
The recently discovered compound contains carbon. Thus, the compound is organic.
The new novel was written by a Nobel laureate. Thus, it will win the book of the year award.
The manufacturing plant uses solar power. Thus, the plant is environmentally friendly.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Highway expansion matches with 'increases traffic flow should be approved'; carbon compound matches with 'contain carbon are organic'; Nobel novel matches with 'written by a Nobel laureate will win'; solar plant matches with 'use solar power are environmentally friendly'.
Each correctly matched assumption follows the formal logic pattern: 'Premise -> Conclusion'. By establishing this universal rule, the fact provided in the premise becomes sufficient to definitively prove the conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze each argument to identify its stated premise and its final conclusion.
For example, in the first argument, Premise: 'will increase traffic flow', Conclusion: 'should be approved'.
Finding the structural components of the argument is the first step in identifying the missing logical gap.
2
Determine the required sufficient assumption by linking the premise directly to the conclusion.
The correct format for the assumption is 'If [Premise], then [Conclusion]'. For the first argument, this means 'If it increases traffic flow, it should be approved'.
A sufficient assumption mathematically guarantees the conclusion, completing the deductive bridge.
3
Match each argument with its corresponding 'If Premise, then Conclusion' statement from the available options.
The four correct statements directly link the provided premises to their respective conclusions without reversing the logic.
Reversing the logic (If Conclusion, then Premise) is a common trap and does not guarantee the conclusion.

Key Concept

Sufficient Assumption
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Question 132Question →

Labor Economist: Analysts predict that integrating generative AI will cause severe workforce contraction because it executes routine tasks faster than humans. This ignores historical precedent. In the 1980s, spreadsheet software automated manual calculations but ultimately expanded accounting employment by reducing the cost of financial analysis, thereby catalyzing massive demand for such services. Therefore, generative AI will similarly yield a net employment expansion within adopting industries.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the labor economist's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The cost reductions achieved through the integration of generative AI will not be restricted to industries where lower prices are incapable of stimulating increased demand.

Answer

The cost reductions achieved through the integration of generative AI will not be restricted to industries where lower prices are incapable of stimulating increased demand.
The argument relies heavily on an analogy to spreadsheet software, where cost reductions led to a surge in demand that ultimately created more jobs. For this analogy to hold and guarantee a net employment expansion, it must be true that the industries adopting AI can actually experience increased demand when their service costs drop. If cost reductions are entirely restricted to industries where lower prices cannot stimulate demand (the logical negation of this option), the fundamental mechanism fails, and employment will not expand. Therefore, the argument depends on this assumption.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's main conclusion.
Generative AI will yield a net employment expansion within the industries that adopt it.
This establishes the final claim that the author is trying to prove.
2
Identify the core premises supporting the conclusion.
Spreadsheet software expanded employment because the resulting cost reductions catalyzed massive demand for financial services.
The author uses an argument by analogy, relying on this historical precedent as the logical foundation.
3
Recognize the logical gap between the premise and conclusion.
The author assumes that the specific mechanism that worked for spreadsheets (lower costs leading to increased demand that outpaces job automation) will successfully apply to the modern industries adopting generative AI.
For an argument by analogy to hold, the relevant underlying conditions must be similar.
4
Apply the Negation Test to the options to find the logically necessary assumption.
Negating the correct option means cost reductions WILL be restricted to industries where lower prices CANNOT stimulate demand. This completely destroys the mechanism of the argument, invalidating the conclusion.
A necessary assumption is a statement that must be true for the argument to survive; if its negation destroys the argument, it is the correct answer.

Key Concept

Necessary Assumption (Defender/Bridge)
Question 133Question →

Urban Planner: In the city of Oakhaven, the local government recently implemented a "smart traffic light" system at all major intersections in an effort to reduce commute times. Since the system was activated six months ago, the average commute time for residents driving to the city center during peak hours has decreased by 15%. Therefore, it is clear that the new smart traffic light system is responsible for this reduction in commute times.

Which of the following statements, if true, most strengthen the argument? Select all that apply.

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Over the past six months, the total volume of vehicular traffic entering Oakhaven's city center during peak hours has steadily increased.; Neighboring cities with similar infrastructure that did not install smart traffic lights experienced no decrease in average commute times over the same six-month period.

Answer

The correct statements are the one indicating an increase in total traffic volume and the one demonstrating that neighboring cities without the system saw no reduction in commute times.
To strengthen a causal argument, one must provide evidence that supports the proposed cause over alternative explanations. The statement showing an increase in traffic volume strengthens the argument by ruling out 'fewer cars on the road' as an alternative cause (in fact, if volume increased but times decreased, the lights must be highly effective). The statement showing no improvement in neighboring cities acts as a control group, demonstrating that where the cause (smart lights) is absent, the effect (reduced commute time) is also absent.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The new smart traffic light system is responsible for the 15% reduction in commute times.
This establishes the core causal claim that must be strengthened.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The system was activated six months ago, and commute times decreased by 15% during that exact same timeframe.
Understanding the evidence reveals that the argument relies entirely on a chronological correlation.
3
Identify the logical gap (flaw) in the argument.
The argument assumes causation based solely on correlation. It fails to account for other factors that might have reduced commute times over the last six months.
To strengthen a causal argument, you must usually patch its core vulnerability by ruling out alternative causes or confirming the cause-and-effect relationship.
4
Evaluate options to find those that bridge the logical gap.
One correct option shows that traffic volume increased (eliminating 'fewer cars' as an alternative cause). The other correct option shows that without the new lights, similar cities saw no improvement (showing cause-without-effect controls).
Both selected options independently bolster the causal claim using standard logical reasoning techniques.

Key Concept

Strengthening Causal Arguments (Ruling out alternatives and showing control groups)
Question 134Question →

Match each flawed argument to the correct description of its logical reasoning error.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

The proposed ban on loud music in the park is supported by Councilman Miller. However, Miller is known for being grumpy and disliking young people. Therefore, the proposed ban is a terrible idea.
A recent study shows that people who drink green tea regularly tend to live longer than those who do not. Clearly, drinking green tea directly extends a person's lifespan.
To bake a perfect loaf of bread, one must use high-quality flour. Susan used the most expensive, high-quality flour available, so her bread is guaranteed to be perfect.
Every individual musician in the city's symphony orchestra is world-renowned and a brilliant soloist. Therefore, the orchestra as a whole must sound brilliant when playing together.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct pairings map the Councilman Miller argument to the personal characteristics flaw, the green tea argument to the correlation/causation flaw, the bread argument to the required/guaranteed condition flaw, and the orchestra argument to the parts/whole flaw.
Each argument commits a foundational logical fallacy frequently tested on the exam. The first argument attacks the speaker (Ad Hominem). The second confuses an observed trend with a definitive cause. The third treats an essential ingredient as a guarantee of success (Illegal Reversal). The fourth assumes a group shares the exact traits of its individual members (Composition).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze each argument to isolate the conclusion and the supporting premises.
Identified the logical leaps: attacking character, confusing correlation with cause, confusing necessary with sufficient, and confusing parts with the whole.
Identifying the disconnect between premise and conclusion is the core task in spotting logical flaws.
2
Review the descriptions of the logical flaws provided in the right-hand list.
Matched the abstract descriptions to the specific flawed patterns identified in Step 1.
LSAT questions require translating specific scenarios into abstract logical rules or flaws.

Key Concept

Flaw in the Reasoning
Question 135Question →

Art Conservator: A recently unearthed landscape painting bears the signature of Clara Vane and perfectly matches her distinctive brushwork. However, chemical analysis reveals traces of cerulean blue in the sky section—a synthetic pigment not commercially available until 1860, eight years after Vane's death. Consequently, the painting cannot be an authentic work by Vane and must be a clever forgery.

Is the following statement about the argument true or false?

The conservator's argument requires the assumption that the cerulean blue pigment was not applied to an authentic Vane canvas during a subsequent restoration or modification effort.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

The statement is True. The argument inherently relies on the assumption that the pigment was part of the original composition rather than a later addition.
The statement is true because it identifies a 'defender' assumption necessary for the conclusion to hold. The argument concludes the painting must be a forgery solely because it contains a pigment from 1860. By applying the Negation Test, if we assume the pigment WAS applied to an authentic Vane canvas during a later restoration, then the painting is not inherently a forgery, and the conclusion is entirely destroyed. Thus, the author must assume no such restoration occurred.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the premises and the conclusion of the argument.
Premise 1: The painting has cerulean blue, available in 1860. Premise 2: The artist died in 1852. Conclusion: The painting must be a forgery.
Deconstructing the argument is the necessary first step to finding its logical gaps.
2
Identify the logical leap made by the author.
The author jumps from the fact that the painting 'contains a newer material' to the definitive conclusion that 'the entire object was created at a later date'.
Understanding the logical gap points directly to what the author must be assuming to bridge it.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the provided statement.
Negated statement: The cerulean blue WAS applied to an authentic Vane canvas during a subsequent restoration or modification effort.
The Negation Test is the most reliable analytical tool to prove if an assumption is strictly necessary.
4
Evaluate the effect of the negated statement on the argument's conclusion.
If the newer pigment was simply added later to an otherwise authentic painting, the conclusion that the entire artwork 'must be a clever forgery' is completely destroyed.
Because the negated statement invalidates the conclusion, the original statement is proven to be a logically necessary assumption.

Key Concept

Applying the Negation Test to identify 'Defender' assumptions that rule out alternate explanations.
Question 136Question →

Argument: Last year, the Sunnyvale City Council launched a public awareness campaign promoting the health benefits of eating locally grown produce. Over the past twelve months, the sales of locally grown produce at Sunnyvale farmers' markets have doubled. The city council concludes that their public awareness campaign successfully persuaded residents to buy more local produce.

Statement: The new fact that a massive nationwide shortage of non-local produce drastically increased the prices of imported vegetables over the last twelve months actively weakens the city council's conclusion.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True
The factual assertion is true. The argument relies on a causal link between the awareness campaign and the increase in sales. By introducing a different, highly practical economic reason for people to buy local produce (imported produce became too expensive), the new fact provides a strong alternative explanation for the observed phenomenon. This directly undermines the conclusion that the campaign was the driving force behind the increased sales.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's premises and conclusion.
Premise: Campaign launched, local produce sales doubled. Conclusion: The campaign caused the increase in sales.
Understanding the exact causal claim is necessary to evaluate whether it can be weakened.
2
Analyze the logical gap in the argument.
The argument assumes that because the campaign preceded the increase in sales, it must have caused the increase, ignoring other potential economic or environmental factors.
Weakening an argument usually involves exploiting its logical gap, such as a jump from correlation to causation.
3
Evaluate the impact of the new factual assertion on the argument's conclusion.
The new fact introduces a competing cause for the increased sales: high prices of alternative (imported) produce. This makes the campaign less likely to be the actual cause.
To determine if the statement is true, we must verify if the new fact actively undermines the causal relationship claimed in the conclusion.

Key Concept

Identifying alternative causes to weaken causal conclusions.
Question 137Question →

Marine Biologist: To restore the declining coral reefs off the coast of Marland Island, the local government banned commercial fishing within a 10-mile radius three years ago. Recent surveys show that the coral density in this protected zone has increased by 30%. Therefore, the ban on commercial fishing directly caused this recovery of the coral reefs.

Which of the following are necessary assumptions upon which the marine biologist's argument depends? Select all that apply.

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The observed increase in coral density was not entirely the result of environmental changes independent of the fishing ban.; Prior to the ban, commercial fishing operations were negatively impacting the health of the coral reefs in the protected zone.

Answer

The correct assumptions are that independent environmental changes were not the sole cause of the recovery, and that commercial fishing was actually negatively impacting the reefs before the ban.
When an argument concludes that one event directly caused another simply because it occurred beforehand, it relies on two primary types of necessary assumptions. First, it must assume that there was no alternate cause entirely responsible for the observed effect (a 'defender' assumption). Second, it must assume that the supposed cause actually had a mechanism to influence the situation. The correct choices establish that natural environmental changes did not act alone, and that commercial fishing was genuinely harming the reef prior to the ban.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core components of the argument.
Premise: A fishing ban was implemented, followed by a 30% increase in coral density. Conclusion: The ban directly caused the recovery.
Deconstructing the argument highlights that it relies entirely on a sequence of events to establish a causal relationship.
2
Anticipate the logical gaps in a causal argument.
For A to cause B, B cannot have been caused entirely by an alternate factor (C), and A must actually have the capacity to affect B.
Causal arguments frequently ignore alternate causes or assume an impact that didn't exist.
3
Apply the Negation Test to candidate answers.
Negating the correct choices destroys the conclusion. If independent factors caused the entire recovery, the ban did not. If fishing never harmed the reef, banning it didn't help.
The Negation Test proves whether an assumption is strictly logically necessary for the conclusion to hold.

Key Concept

Necessary Assumption (Defending Causal Claims)
Question 138Question →

Mayor: Over the past five years, the number of community gardens in our city has doubled. During this exact same time period, the city's crime rate has dropped by 15 percent. Therefore, it is clear that building more community gardens reduces crime.

The reasoning in the mayor's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument...

Show answer & explanation

Answer: presumes, without providing justification, that a correlation between two events implies that one causes the other.

Answer

The argument presumes, without providing justification, that a correlation between two events implies that one causes the other.
The correct answer accurately describes the classic 'correlation implies causation' fallacy. The mayor observes two simultaneous trends over a five-year period—an increase in community gardens and a decrease in crime—and improperly concludes that the first trend directly caused the second, ignoring other potential variables that could have reduced crime.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premises of the argument.
Premise 1: Community gardens doubled. Premise 2: The crime rate dropped by 15 percent during the exact same period.
Understanding the evidence provided is the first step in evaluating the argument's structure.
2
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
Conclusion: Building more community gardens reduces crime.
The logical flaw will always be found in the leap from the premises to the main conclusion.
3
Analyze the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises state that two events happened at the same time (a correlation). The conclusion leaps to stating that one event caused the other (causation).
Identifying this gap reveals the specific logical flaw committed in the reasoning.

Key Concept

Correlation vs. Causation
Question 139Question →

Mayor: To attract more young families to our city, we must invest heavily in expanding our network of public parks. A comprehensive statewide survey reveals that the vast majority of young families cite access to ample green spaces as a primary factor when choosing a municipality in which to settle.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the mayor's argument depends?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Prospective young families do not currently view the city's existing green spaces as fully adequate for their needs.

Answer

Prospective young families do not currently view the city's existing green spaces as fully adequate for their needs.
The correct answer acts as a 'defender' assumption. The mayor claims that creating more parks will attract young families because they desire green spaces. However, this logic only holds if the city is currently lacking in green spaces from the perspective of those families. If the city already had perfectly adequate parks, expanding them would yield no additional demographic benefit based on the survey's findings. Therefore, the argument depends on the assumption that current green spaces are inadequate.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that expanding the network of public parks will attract more young families to the city.
This establishes the causal outcome the mayor believes the proposed investment will achieve.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The primary premise is a survey indicating that young families consider access to ample green spaces a primary factor in choosing where to live.
This shows the evidence the mayor uses to justify the proposed park expansion.
3
Locate the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The evidence shows young families want green spaces, and the conclusion says adding MORE parks will attract them. The gap is the assumption that the city does not already have enough parks to satisfy this desire.
A necessary assumption must bridge this gap or defend the argument against potential weaknesses.
4
Apply the Negation Test to the candidate answer choices.
Negating the correct statement yields: 'Prospective young families ALREADY view the city's existing green spaces as fully adequate.' If this is true, adding more parks would not act as a draw, destroying the mayor's argument.
The Negation Test definitively proves whether a statement is strictly necessary for the argument to hold.

Key Concept

Necessary Assumption (Defender Pattern)
Question 140Question →

Wildlife Biologist: Recent tests reveal that urban coyotes exhibit baseline cortisol levels—a primary indicator of physiological stress—that are significantly higher than those of rural coyotes. Yet over the past decade, the number of pups born annually in the urban coyote population has increased dramatically. Clearly, elevated cortisol levels do not impede reproductive success in coyotes.

The wildlife biologist's argument relies on which of the following assumptions? (Select all that apply.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The elevated cortisol levels observed in the urban population are not confined exclusively to non-breeding coyotes.; The high baseline cortisol levels in urban coyotes are present during the specific times of year when the animals are mating and gestating.

Answer

The argument depends on two assumptions: that the elevated cortisol is not isolated only in the non-breeding coyotes, and that the cortisol is actually present during the mating and gestating periods.
For the author to conclude that high cortisol does not impede reproduction based on the urban coyote population's birth rate, the author MUST assume that the high cortisol is actually interacting with the reproductive process. This requires two 'defender' assumptions: the stress cannot be isolated demographically (only in non-breeders) and it cannot be isolated temporally (only present outside of mating season). If either of these boundaries existed, the argument's evidence would be irrelevant to its conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core components of the argument.
Premise: Urban coyotes have high cortisol and produce many pups. Conclusion: High cortisol does not impede reproductive success.
Deconstructing the stimulus is required to isolate the logical gap between the evidence provided and the absolute claim made in the conclusion.
2
Analyze the logical gap in the reasoning.
The author assumes that the physiological state (high cortisol) is actually interacting with the biological process (reproduction).
If a trait is observed in a population, it cannot be assumed to affect a specific mechanism unless it is present in the individuals performing that mechanism, at the time they are performing it.
3
Evaluate the choices using the Negation Test.
Negating the correct options severs the connection between the high cortisol and the act of reproducing, which destroys the author's ability to draw a conclusion about their relationship.
The Negation Test is the most definitive way to verify if an assumption is strictly logically necessary.

Key Concept

Necessary Assumption (Defender Strategy)
Estimated Time:2m 0s
PreviousPage 7 / 15Next
Argument Evaluation Practice Questions — LSAT — Page 7 | Examkin