PrepTest 115, Section 2, Question 17
Columnist: Over the last 20 years the demand(95 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- AThe fuel efficiency(12 more words not shown)
- BIf the Japanese(20 more words not shown)
- CJapanese automotive safety(11 more words not shown)
- DGiven a choice(20 more words not shown)
- EThe automotive trade(20 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe the steering wheel is a problem. But what if Japanese buyers simply prefer Japanese cars? Improving a North American car's fuel efficiency, reliability, or layout wouldn't necessarily overcome that preference.
That is my first concern about the columnist's proposed fix. The cars have caught up on fuel efficiency and reliability, but the columnist now points to something different: Japanese drivers use the left side of the road, while North American exporters haven't adjusted the steering wheel accordingly. We're moving from how people drive to what would make these cars easier to sell.
Be careful about how much the conclusion promises. It says moving the steering wheel would remove one obstacle to reducing the trade imbalance. It doesn't say every other obstacle would disappear or that most Japanese buyers would suddenly choose North American cars. My concern about other preferences could remain even if this limited conclusion were right.
What we’re looking for
For the required-assumption question, we need something the proposed benefit depends on. Keep the focus on the claimed connection between the car's layout and buyers' willingness to purchase it. We don't need a guarantee that the whole plan succeeds.
Working the answers
- A
The cars have already caught up by the two standards discussed. They could stay at their current level of fuel efficiency and reliability while a change in steering-wheel placement removed a separate obstacle. The argument doesn't need further improvements in those two qualities.
- BCorrect
This identifies the relevant obstacle: people who drive on the left are disinclined to buy cars with left-side steering wheels. Now the proposed change addresses something holding buyers back. My first concern was that other barriers might remain, but the columnist only needs wheel placement to be one barrier. If buyers were just as willing to buy the left-side versions, the stated reason for changing the layout would lose its force.
- C
A legal requirement could explain why steering-wheel placement matters, but the argument doesn't require a law. Buyers could dislike the left-side layout even if it were perfectly legal. C also specifies new domestic automobiles, rather than establishing a requirement for the North American imports under discussion.
- D
Most buyers don't have to favor the North American model. Even if only a small share became more willing to buy it, changing the steering wheel could remove an obstacle. A claim about a majority choosing the imports promises much more than the conclusion needs.
- E
This says better meeting Japanese buyers' needs is the only way to lessen the imbalance. The columnist proposes one useful change, not the sole possible route. For example, demand in North America for Japanese cars might fall for a separate reason. The argument doesn't have to rule out other ways the imbalance could shrink.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.