PrepTest 115, Section 2, Question 20
Productivity is average output per worker per unit(22 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the argument(11 more words not shown)
- Aconfuses a stated(13 more words not shown)
- Bignores the possibility(11 more words not shown)
- Coverlooks the fact(11 more words not shown)
- Dpresumes without giving(12 more words not shown)
- Epresumes without giving(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What if the workers need high-tech equipment to get adequate training? Imagine a job that requires practice on a sophisticated machine. Training the workers and providing the equipment wouldn't be competing routes to productivity. The equipment could be part of what makes the training possible.
Accept the stated requirement: workers cannot achieve high productivity without adequate training. That tells us training is needed. It doesn't tell us training is all they need, or that no other requirement could sit behind it.
What we’re looking for
The conclusion suddenly dismisses dependence on high-tech equipment, even though the premise says nothing about the relationship between equipment and training. For the flaw question, I'd look for the possibility we just raised: the required training might itself require that equipment.
Working the answers
- A
The stated requirement is for high productivity: adequate training. The passage never gives a requirement for having high-tech equipment. A assigns the requirement to the wrong thing, so it doesn't describe the reasoning here.
- BCorrect
If adequate training requires high-tech equipment, and high productivity requires adequate training, then high productivity would depend on having that equipment. That possibility fits the premise but conflicts with the conclusion. The author cannot dismiss the equipment just by identifying training as a requirement.
- C
We aren't deciding whether greater productivity would be desirable. The argument concerns what achieving high productivity depends on. Even if a company didn't want more output in a particular situation, that wouldn't settle whether equipment was needed to achieve it.
- D
Requiring training doesn't mean training always produces an improvement. A worker could receive adequate training and still fail to become more productive for another reason. The author states that training is needed for high productivity; D attributes the stronger claim that education always increases productivity.
- E
Equipment could help without being required. Think of a machine that makes an already productive worker faster: it contributes, even if the worker could reach high productivity without it. The conclusion denies dependence on equipment, not every possible benefit from equipment. E attacks the stronger claim that equipment cannot help at all.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.