LR Drill Set 6, Question 6
The asteroid Alpha-6, with a velocity of 85,000(70 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AIt takes for(16 more words not shown)
- BIt fails to(14 more words not shown)
- CIt takes for(28 more words not shown)
- DIt overlooks the(23 more words not shown)
- EIt presumes, without(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What happened to “known”?
Alpha-6 begins as the fastest known nonplanetary object in the galaxy. By the conclusion, it's simply the fastest. Those claims aren't interchangeable. Our best observation might still miss something faster beyond the range of our instruments or in an area we haven't examined.
The report about a new asteroid gives us another issue to consider. Its measured speed was overstated, but by how much? A correction from 93,000 to 90,000 kilometers per second would still leave it faster than Alpha-6 at 85,000. The passage doesn't supply a corrected speed.
What we’re looking for
Even granting the author that this particular challenger doesn't beat Alpha-6, the bigger problem remains. Knocking out one reported discovery doesn't establish that nothing faster exists anywhere in the galaxy. The flaw answer I expect is the ignored possibility of an undiscovered faster object. We don't need outside astronomy or a prediction about what telescopes will eventually find to see that gap.
Working the answers
- A
This shifts to what astronomers will ever discover. The conclusion concerns what is fastest in the galaxy now; it doesn't rule out an object becoming faster later and then being discovered. The immediate problem is that a faster object may already exist without our knowing it. D captures that present gap directly, without the stronger claim about all future discoveries.
- B
The error in the computer program is a stated premise. We can accept that error and still criticize the conclusion. Demanding conclusive evidence for every premise would sidestep the actual problem: even an unreliable report of one faster asteroid doesn't turn the fastest known object into the fastest object anywhere.
- C
“Could ever travel any faster” makes a claim about the limit of possible speeds. The author doesn't infer that 85,000 kilometers per second is an unbreakable ceiling. Claiming one object is currently the fastest is different from claiming no object could ever exceed its speed. C attacks that stronger, unstated claim.
- DCorrect
A faster object might already be out there, undiscovered. Then Alpha-6 could be the fastest one known while failing to be the fastest in the galaxy. That scenario preserves the useful part of the premise and contradicts the conclusion, showing exactly why dropping “known” matters. Discrediting the recent claim doesn't remove this possibility.
- E
The conclusion identifies a particular asteroid as fastest. It doesn't first assume that only asteroids can be fastest and use that rule to exclude everything else. An undiscovered faster object could be an asteroid or something else; the problem is the missing knowledge, not a stated restriction based on the type of object.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.