LR Drill Set 8, Question 3
Drivers who claim that it is dangerous to(38 more words not shown)
A reasoning flaw in the(5 more words not shown)
- Aappeals to popular(1 more words not shown)
- Bfails to distinguish(6 more words not shown)
- Cdoes not assess(6 more words not shown)
- Ddoes not actually(6 more words not shown)
- Efails to consider(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
We can need trucks and still be worried about how dangerous they are.
The author points to a shopping mall that has no airstrip, dock, or rail connection. Fine: that helps explain why trucks are needed to deliver its goods. But the drivers' complaint was about the danger of having so many trucks on the highways. Showing that a vehicle is useful doesn't tell us that it is safe. A tool can be essential to a job and still require serious precautions.
What we’re looking for
For the flaw question, I'd look for a failure to answer the complaint. The author responds to “These trucks are dangerous” with “How else would we get our goods?” Those are different questions. Even if there is no good alternative to trucks, the safety concern remains.
Working the answers
- A
The author doesn't argue that a claim is true because lots of people believe it. Pointing out that people depend on trucks is a claim about their practical needs, not a vote on whether trucks are safe. In fact, the author is criticizing the drivers' stated opinion.
- B
Different sizes of trucks might pose different risks, but the basic problem comes before that distinction. The argument never addresses the safety of either group. Even if every truck were the same size, showing that people need deliveries would still fail to show that their safety worries are exaggerated.
- C
The author doesn't actually compare the costs of alternative shipping methods. The mall's lack of an airstrip or dock concerns its access to those methods. But a cost comparison wouldn't fix the central problem anyway. Trucks could be the cheapest available option and still be dangerous. We need an answer that identifies the missing response to the safety claim.
- DCorrect
The author never addresses the potential dangers of trucks. Everything offered concerns our dependence on them. That leaves open the possibility that the drivers are right: there could be a serious danger even though trucks perform a necessary job. Without dealing with that possibility, the author hasn't earned the dismissal of those drivers as alarmists.
- E
A mall doesn't have to sit next to a highway to receive goods from a truck that uses one. The truck could travel along a highway and then take local roads to the mall. More importantly, the safety complaint would remain even if every mall were right beside a highway. The location of malls isn't what makes the response fail.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.