Weaken

51 questions

Question 41Question →

Archaeologist: Excavations at the ancient settlement of Veridia have uncovered hundreds of specialized obsidian tools. Obsidian does not occur naturally anywhere near Veridia. The nearest known geological source of obsidian from that era is the Khalen mountain range, located over 500 miles away. Interestingly, other settlements surrounding Veridia from the same time period show absolutely no evidence of obsidian use. Clearly, the inhabitants of Veridia must have established a direct, exclusive trade route with the people living in the Khalen mountains.

Consider the following statement: Nomadic hunter-gatherer groups frequently traveled between the Khalen mountains and the Veridian region, bartering raw materials for food with isolated settlements along their migration paths.

The provided statement, if true, actively weakens the archaeologist's argument.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True, the statement weakens the argument by providing an alternative explanation for the presence of the obsidian.
The archaeologist concludes that the people of Veridia must have established a direct trade route based on the presence of distant obsidian. The provided statement introduces an alternative explanation: nomadic groups acted as intermediaries. If nomads brought the obsidian to Veridia and traded it, the Veridians would not have needed to establish a direct trade route themselves. This alternative explanation accounts for all the premises but makes the conclusion less likely to be true, thereby weakening the argument.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
Conclusion: The inhabitants of Veridia established a direct, exclusive trade route with the people in the Khalen mountains.
To evaluate whether an argument is weakened, you must precisely understand what the author is trying to prove.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
Premises: Obsidian is found in Veridia; the nearest source is 500 miles away; neighboring settlements do not have obsidian.
Understanding the evidence reveals the logical leap the author makes.
3
Identify the logical assumption linking the premises to the conclusion.
The author assumes that a 'direct, exclusive trade route' is the only way Veridia could have uniquely acquired materials from 500 miles away.
Exposing the assumption reveals the argument's vulnerability to alternative explanations.
4
Evaluate the impact of the new statement.
The statement shows that nomadic tribes could have carried the obsidian as middlemen. This severs the assumed necessity of a 'direct' route established by Veridia.
Introducing a plausible alternative explanation that accounts for the evidence (presence of obsidian) without requiring the conclusion (direct trade route) actively weakens the argument.

Key Concept

Evaluating alternative explanations to undermine causal or historical reasoning.
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Question 42Question →

Match each argument on the left with the piece of counter-evidence on the right that most effectively weakens its conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

To increase overall productivity, the city government should adopt a 4-day workweek, just as TechCorp did when they saw a 20% boost in output.
The mayor's new law enforcement policies are highly effective, as violent crime has dropped by 15% since she took office.
Most home cooks clearly prefer gas stoves, since a recent survey of 'Gourmet Chef' magazine readers showed that 80% prefer gas over electric.
The city should install more crosswalks to reduce pedestrian accidents, given that the downtown area has the most crosswalks and the lowest accident rate.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct pairings match each argument with the specific counter-evidence that exploits its logical flaw: the workweek argument pairs with the differing job roles; the crime argument pairs with the demographic shift; the stove preference argument pairs with the unrepresentative survey sample; and the crosswalk argument pairs with the alternate cause of low speed limits.
Each argument contains a distinct logical flaw: a false analogy, a correlation-causation error, a sampling bias, and a third-variable issue. The correct pairings directly exploit these specific gaps, providing alternative explanations or demonstrating that the premises do not guarantee the conclusions.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first argument regarding the 4-day workweek and TechCorp.
Identify that it relies on a comparison (analogy). Look for evidence showing the two entities are not comparable. This matches the statement about TechCorp's flexible projects versus city workers' scheduled service.
Attacking the relevant similarities between two compared items is the primary way to weaken an argument by analogy.
2
Analyze the second argument regarding the mayor's policies and the drop in crime.
Identify a correlation-to-causation flaw. Look for an alternative explanation for the drop in crime. This matches the statement about the demographic shift reducing the crime-prone population.
Providing an alternate cause weakens the conclusion that the stated cause (the mayor's policies) was responsible for the observed effect.
3
Analyze the third argument regarding home cooks and the magazine survey.
Identify a sampling flaw. Look for evidence that the sample does not represent the broader population. This matches the statement that the magazine readers are mostly professional chefs, not typical home cooks.
Showing a sample is biased or unrepresentative invalidates conclusions drawn about the general population based on that sample.
4
Analyze the fourth argument regarding crosswalks and pedestrian accidents.
Identify a flawed causal conclusion drawn from a localized observation. Look for a third factor that causes the observed effect. This matches the statement about downtown's strict speed limits and congestion.
Introducing a third variable that accounts for the observed phenomenon (low accident rates) weakens the original causal claim.

Key Concept

Identifying and exploiting specific logical flaws in arguments, such as false analogies, alternate causes, biased samples, and third-variable correlations.
Question 43Question →

Sociologist: A recent study of corporate professionals reveals a strong positive correlation between the number of hours an individual spends reading fiction per month and their demonstrated empathy in collaborative settings. Therefore, the habit of reading fiction directly enhances a person's capacity for empathy.

Evaluate the following statement as true or false:

The introduction of new data showing that professionals who spend comparable hours reading exclusively non-fiction literature do not exhibit these elevated levels of empathy actively weakens the sociologist's argument.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: False

Answer

False
The statement asserts that the new data weakens the argument. However, the new data actually strengthens the argument. The sociologist concludes that reading specifically fiction causes empathy. The new data shows that when people read non-fiction instead (the specific cause is absent), they do not show elevated empathy (the effect is absent). This eliminates the alternative explanation that the general act of reading increases empathy, thereby making the precise causal link between fiction and empathy stronger. Because the data strengthens the argument, the statement claiming it weakens the argument is strictly false.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the sociologist's argument structure.
Premise: Correlation between reading fiction and empathy. Conclusion: Reading fiction causes an increase in empathy.
Identifying the specific causal claim is necessary to evaluate the impact of new evidence.
2
Evaluate the new factual assertion provided in the statement.
The new data introduces a group that reads non-fiction (the specific cause is absent) and does not show elevated empathy (the effect is absent).
Understanding the nature of the new data is required to test its logical effect on the argument.
3
Determine the logical impact of the new data on the original causal claim.
The data eliminates an alternative explanation (that reading in general causes empathy), thereby strengthening the specific claim that reading fiction is the cause.
In causal reasoning, demonstrating that the effect is absent when the proposed cause is absent strengthens the conclusion by ruling out alternate causes.

Key Concept

Causal reasoning and control groups: eliminating alternative explanations strengthens a causal conclusion.
Question 44Question →

Marine biologist: Over the last decade, the population of the blue-crested penguin on Solara Island has dropped by 30 percent. During this same ten-year period, the number of commercial fishing vessels operating in the island's surrounding waters has doubled. The nets used by these vessels are known to frequently entangle and drown deep-diving seabirds. Therefore, the increase in commercial fishing must be the primary cause of the decline in the blue-crested penguin population.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the marine biologist's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The blue-crested penguin only dives for prey during daylight hours, while the commercial fishing vessels deploy their nets exclusively at night.

Answer

The statement that the penguins only dive during the day while the nets are deployed exclusively at night.
The correct answer destroys the causal mechanism proposed by the author. If the penguins are strictly diurnal and the nets are deployed exclusively at night, the penguins cannot possibly be getting caught in the nets. This completely undermines the conclusion that the nets are responsible for the population decline.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's conclusion.
The increase in commercial fishing is the primary cause of the decline in the blue-crested penguin population.
Understanding the exact claim being made is necessary to find evidence that undermines it.
2
Identify the premises and the proposed causal mechanism.
Premises: Penguin population dropped 30%; fishing vessels doubled; the nets used frequently entangle and drown deep-diving seabirds.
Weaken questions often hinge on the specific mechanism linking the premises to the conclusion.
3
Identify the logical gap (assumption) in the argument.
The argument assumes that the blue-crested penguins on Solara Island are actually encountering these nets and getting entangled in them.
Finding the unstated assumption reveals the vulnerability of the argument.
4
Evaluate the options to find one that attacks this assumption.
The correct option shows that temporal separation (day vs. night) makes it impossible for the penguins to encounter the nets, entirely severing the causal link.
Severing the specific causal mechanism is one of the strongest ways to weaken a causal argument.

Key Concept

Weakening a Causal Argument by Severing the Mechanism
Question 45Question →

Marine biologists studying the decline of coral reefs around the Tolman Islands have blamed the recent rise in local water temperatures. However, a new study shows that reefs surrounding the neighboring Banton Islands, which have experienced the exact same rise in water temperatures, are thriving and show no signs of decline. Therefore, it is clear that rising water temperatures are not the primary cause of the coral decline around the Tolman Islands.

Statement: The assertion that the coral species dominating the Banton Islands reefs possess a unique genetic adaptation making them highly resilient to temperature fluctuations—an adaptation absent in the coral species found around the Tolman Islands—actively weakens the argument above.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True. The introduced assertion actively weakens the argument by destroying the validity of the comparison between the two island reef systems.
The statement is true. The original argument relies on a direct comparison between the Tolman and Banton reefs to conclude that water temperature is not the culprit for coral decline. The new assertion introduces a crucial biological difference, showing that Banton corals can survive temperature spikes that Tolman corals cannot. This completely severs the logical link between the premise (Banton's survival) and the conclusion (temperature is harmless to Tolman), thereby severely weakening the argument.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core argument's premises and conclusion.
Premise: Banton Islands experienced the same temperature rise as Tolman Islands but their reefs are thriving. Conclusion: Rising temperatures are not the primary cause of the Tolman Islands' coral decline.
Deconstructing the stimulus is necessary to evaluate the logical relationship between the evidence and the conclusion.
2
Determine the method of reasoning used in the argument.
The author uses an analogy or comparison, assuming that because the two island groups share one trait (rising temperatures), the outcome should be identical unless temperature is not the true causal factor.
Identifying the assumption (that the two reefs are otherwise highly comparable) highlights the argument's central vulnerability.
3
Evaluate the impact of the new assertion on the argument's central assumption.
The assertion introduces a critical biological difference: Banton corals have a unique genetic resistance to temperature fluctuations that Tolman corals lack.
This step determines whether the new information exposes a flaw in the argument's comparative reasoning.
4
Conclude whether the factual assertion weakens the argument.
Since the Banton corals are biologically equipped to survive the temperature rise while Tolman corals are not, the initial comparison is entirely invalid. This undermines the conclusion.
A factual assertion that destroys the foundational assumption of an argument by analogy successfully weakens the overall conclusion.

Key Concept

Evaluating comparative arguments by identifying relevant differences that invalidate an analogy.
Question 46Question →

Agricultural researcher: A recent survey of farms in the drought-stricken Oakhaven region found that farms utilizing the newly developed MicroDrip irrigation system experienced, on average, a 25 percent lower rate of crop failure than farms using traditional overhead sprinklers. Since both systems draw water from the same dwindling regional reservoir, it is clear that the MicroDrip system delivers water to plant roots more efficiently than overhead sprinklers do.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the agricultural researcher's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Due to its specific tubing configuration, the MicroDrip system is predominantly utilized for deep-rooted crops, which are inherently more resilient to extended drought.

Answer

The statement indicating that the MicroDrip system is predominantly used for deep-rooted crops, which are naturally more resilient to drought.
This choice introduces a viable alternative explanation for the lower rate of crop failure. If the farms using the MicroDrip system are primarily growing crops that are inherently more resilient to drought, then the lower failure rate is likely due to the natural hardiness of those crops rather than the efficiency of the water delivery system. By providing an alternative cause for the correlation, this option severely undermines the researcher's conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The MicroDrip system delivers water to plant roots more efficiently than overhead sprinklers do.
This is the primary claim the researcher is attempting to prove based on the survey data.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
MicroDrip users have a 25 percent lower rate of crop failure, and both systems use water from the same reservoir.
These facts serve as the foundational evidence for the researcher's causal claim.
3
Spot the logical gap or flaw in the reasoning.
The argument assumes that the only possible reason for the lower crop failure rate is the irrigation system's efficiency, ignoring other potential variables.
A correlation (using MicroDrip and having lower crop failure) does not definitively prove causation, as there could be an alternative cause.
4
Select the option that exploits this logical gap.
The option stating that MicroDrip is used for deep-rooted, naturally drought-resilient crops weakens the argument.
It provides a highly viable alternative explanation for the lower crop failure rate, thereby severing the assumed causal link to the irrigation system's efficiency.

Key Concept

Alternative Causation and Correlational Flaws
Question 47Question →

Paleontologist: Fossils of the extinct dire wolf are frequently found in the exact same sedimentary layers as the remains of large, herbivorous megafauna. Because dire wolves possessed exceptionally robust jaws and teeth capable of crushing thick bones, it is clear that they primarily hunted and brought down these large herbivores.

Statement: The paleontologist's argument is actively weakened by the newly discovered fact that the bone-crushing jaw structure of the dire wolf is anatomically identical to that of modern specialized scavengers, which feed exclusively on the abandoned carcasses of animals killed by other predators.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True. The newly introduced fact actively weakens the paleontologist's argument.
The statement is objectively true. The newly introduced fact provides a highly plausible alternative explanation for why the dire wolf had bone-crushing jaws and why it was found near large carcasses. If dire wolves were scavengers, the paleontologist's conclusion that they hunted and brought down large herbivores is severely undermined.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's conclusion and premises.
Conclusion: Dire wolves primarily hunted and brought down large herbivores. Premises: Their fossils are found near megafauna, and they possessed bone-crushing jaws.
To evaluate the impact of new evidence, one must isolate the exact claim the author is attempting to prove.
2
Identify the logical gap or assumption connecting the premises to the conclusion.
The paleontologist assumes that having bone-crushing jaws is a trait exclusively indicating an active hunter of large prey, ignoring other evolutionary reasons for such jaws.
Arguments are most effectively weakened by attacking their unstated assumptions.
3
Evaluate the impact of the new factual assertion on this assumption.
The new fact demonstrates that bone-crushing jaws are a characteristic trait of specialized scavengers that do not hunt.
Determining whether the new information exposes the logical gap.
4
Determine if the conclusion is rendered less likely to be true.
Since the evidence (jaws and fossil proximity) can now be perfectly explained by scavenging behavior, the conclusion that they actively hunted is significantly undermined.
To form the final judgment on whether the argument is effectively weakened.

Key Concept

Weakening an argument by introducing an alternative explanation for the presented evidence.
Question 48Question →

Below are four distinct arguments (left) and four potential pieces of counter-evidence (right). Identify which specific fact provides the strongest logical challenge to each argument's central conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Since the municipal water treatment plant upgraded its filtration system, reports of waterborne illnesses have dropped by 50%. The new filtration system is clearly responsible for the improved public health.
A poll conducted among attendees of the annual Tech Innovators Conference found that 90% believe artificial intelligence will replace most administrative jobs within five years. Therefore, the vast majority of the workforce expects AI to eliminate administrative roles.
The total number of workplace safety violations cited by inspectors at the local manufacturing plant decreased significantly this year. It is evident that the factory's workers are adhering more strictly to safety protocols.
In laboratory trials, Compound Z successfully eradicated a newly discovered strain of bacteria in isolated tissue cultures. Thus, administering Compound Z to human patients infected with this bacterial strain will be an effective cure.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The arguments logically match with the counter-evidence as follows: The water filtration argument pairs with the public boiling water campaign. The tech poll argument pairs with the statement about specialized professionals having different perspectives. The safety violations argument pairs with the fact about reduced factory inspections. The Compound Z argument pairs with the evidence about the human digestive system neutralizing the compound.
Each argument contains a classic logical flaw. The correct pairings map the specific vulnerability of each argument to the one piece of evidence that directly targets that vulnerability: an alternative cause for a causal flaw, unrepresentative data for a sampling flaw, changing measurement conditions for a numerical flaw, and relevant differences for an analogy.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first argument regarding waterborne illnesses.
Identify that the argument commits a correlation-to-causation flaw.
To weaken a causal claim, you must look for an alternative explanation, which is found in the fact about the public boiling their water.
2
Analyze the second argument regarding the AI poll.
Identify that it relies on a potentially biased sample (tech conference attendees vs. general workforce).
To weaken a generalization, you must show the sample is unrepresentative, which is explicitly stated in the fact about differing perspectives on automation.
3
Analyze the third argument regarding safety violations.
Identify a numbers versus reality flaw (fewer citations does not necessarily mean fewer actual violations).
To weaken this, look for a structural reason for the drop in numbers, such as the fact indicating a drastic reduction in the number of inspections conducted.
4
Analyze the fourth argument regarding Compound Z.
Identify an analogy flaw comparing isolated tissue cultures to live human patients.
To weaken this medical analogy, find evidence showing a relevant difference between the two environments, like the digestive system neutralizing the compound.

Key Concept

Identifying specific logical flaws (causation, sampling bias, numbers vs. rates, and faulty analogies) and selecting counter-evidence that exploits those exact vulnerabilities.
Question 49Question →

Health Columnist: A recent study of 10,000 adults found that those who consistently read books before bed are 40% less likely to suffer from chronic insomnia compared to those who watch television before bed. Therefore, individuals who currently watch television before bed can significantly reduce their risk of developing chronic insomnia simply by replacing their evening television viewing with reading.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: People who are already experiencing the early stages of insomnia typically find that they lack the concentration needed to read a book and instead default to watching television.

Answer

People who are already experiencing the early stages of insomnia typically find that they lack the concentration needed to read a book and instead default to watching television.
The argument observes a correlation between television watching and insomnia, and concludes that television watching causes insomnia. The correct answer weakens this causal claim by providing a reverse-causality explanation: the onset of insomnia actually causes people to watch television because they lose the concentration required to read. If the insomnia is what causes the activity choice, then forcing a change in the activity will not prevent the insomnia.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that replacing evening television viewing with reading will significantly reduce a person's risk of developing chronic insomnia.
Understanding the exact claim being made is essential for finding what undermines it.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The premise is a study showing that people who read before bed are 40% less likely to suffer from chronic insomnia than those who watch television.
This establishes the evidence the author uses, revealing a correlation between evening activities and insomnia rates.
3
Analyze the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The author assumes that because television viewing and insomnia are correlated, the television viewing must be causing the insomnia.
Identifying the assumption (causation from correlation) exposes the argument's vulnerability.
4
Evaluate the options to find one that attacks this assumption.
The correct option shows that the onset of insomnia actually causes people to choose television over reading.
If the early stages of insomnia cause the behavior, then changing the behavior will not prevent the insomnia, effectively destroying the argument's conclusion.

Key Concept

Alternative explanations for causal claims (specifically, reverse causation).
Question 50Question →

Read the following argument:

City Official: Six months ago, we doubled the fines for illegal parking in the downtown commercial district to reduce parking violations. Since the new fines took effect, the number of illegal parking citations issued by traffic enforcement in the district has decreased by 40%. This sharp decline demonstrates that the increased fines have successfully deterred drivers from parking illegally.

The introduction of the fact that 'Due to an ongoing infrastructure project, overall vehicle traffic entering the downtown commercial district has decreased by 50% over the past six months' actively weakens the city official's argument.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

The statement is true because the introduced fact provides a compelling alternative explanation for the decrease in parking citations.
The factual assertion introduces an alternative cause for the 40% decrease in parking citations: a 50% drop in overall traffic. If there are half as many cars in the area, a proportional drop in citations is mathematically expected regardless of any change in driver behavior or deterrence. This severs the causal link assumed by the city official, thereby actively weakening the argument. Thus, the statement evaluating this logical dynamic is unequivocally true.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's premises and main conclusion.
Premise: Fines were doubled, and parking citations dropped by 40%. Conclusion: The increased fines successfully deterred illegal parking.
Understanding the core structure of the argument is essential to finding its logical gap.
2
Analyze the logical gap and the primary flaw in the reasoning.
The official assumes that the drop in citations was caused entirely by the increased fines, ignoring other potential factors that could reduce the raw number of citations.
Recognizing a correlation-to-causation leap helps predict what kind of evidence will weaken the argument.
3
Evaluate the new factual assertion against the argument's conclusion.
The new fact reveals that total vehicle traffic dropped by 50%. A 50% reduction in cars easily explains a 40% drop in citations without needing to credit the new fines.
To weaken the argument, the new fact must make the conclusion less likely to follow from the premises, which this alternative explanation does perfectly.

Key Concept

Weakening a causal conclusion by introducing a viable alternative explanation for an observed correlation.
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Question 51Question →

Management Consultant: A recent industry survey of logistics firms showed that those firms adopting centralized algorithmic routing software experienced a 20% reduction in average delivery times over the past year. In contrast, firms relying on traditional human dispatchers saw only a 5% reduction. Therefore, the transition to algorithmic routing software is directly responsible for the superior improvement in delivery efficiency among these firms.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the management consultant's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The logistics firms that adopted algorithmic routing software were predominantly those that had recently replaced their delivery vehicles with newer, significantly faster models.

Answer

The statement indicating that the software-adopting firms predominantly replaced their vehicles with significantly faster models.
The argument concludes that the algorithmic routing software caused the 20% reduction in delivery times, based purely on the correlation that firms adopting the software experienced this reduction. The correct answer weakens this causal claim by introducing an alternative cause: the firms that adopted the software also recently acquired newer, significantly faster vehicles. This suggests that the new vehicles, rather than the software, may be responsible for the improved efficiency.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's conclusion.
The conclusion is that the transition to algorithmic routing software directly caused the superior improvement in delivery efficiency.
Understanding the exact claim being made is necessary to find what would undermine it.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The premise is a correlation: firms using the software saw a 20% reduction in delivery times, while those using human dispatchers saw a 5% reduction.
Isolating the evidence reveals the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
3
Identify the logical flaw or gap in the reasoning.
The argument assumes causation based entirely on a correlation, failing to consider other factors that might have caused the 20% reduction in delivery times for the software group.
Finding the vulnerability in the argument allows for the selection of an answer choice that exploits this weakness.
4
Evaluate the answer choices to find the one that exploits the gap.
The option stating that these firms recently acquired newer, faster vehicles provides an alternative cause for the reduced delivery times, thereby weakening the causal claim about the software.
An effective weakener for a causal argument often presents an alternative explanation for the observed effect.

Key Concept

Identifying and exploiting alternative causes in causal arguments.
Estimated Time:1m 30s
PreviousPage 3 / 3
Weaken Practice Questions — LSAT — Page 3 | Examkin