PrepTest 130, Section 1, Question 18
Travel agent: Although most low-fare airlines have had(54 more words not shown)
Of the following, which one(15 more words not shown)
- AThe argument fails(26 more words not shown)
- BThe argument draws(31 more words not shown)
- CThe argument fails(22 more words not shown)
- DThe argument takes(17 more words not shown)
- EThe argument fails(26 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A newer airline with few accidents may simply not have flown long enough for us to judge its safety reliably. That leaves uncertainty. It doesn't establish that the airline is dangerous.
The travel agent contrasts those short records with major airlines' long-standing records, then concludes that passengers are safer with the major airlines. I want to pause at that comparison. Knowing less about one airline doesn't, by itself, show that flying with it is riskier. Perhaps the newer airline is very safe and we just haven't accumulated much evidence yet.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks for the strongest criticism. My initial objection is that the argument moves from limited evidence about the newer airlines to a conclusion that they're less safe. We need an actual comparison of safety, not just a comparison of how much evidence we have.
Working the answers
- A
Total accidents aren't enough to compare the risk of taking a flight. Imagine one airline has flown a million times with two crashes and another has flown five times with one crash. The first has more crashes in total, but that doesn't make it riskier per flight. Equal or greater accident totals for the major airlines therefore wouldn't, by themselves, challenge the claimed safety comparison.
- B
The passage says the major airlines' records are long-standing and reliable. Only the newer low-fare airlines are said to lack enough history. Calling each record too brief misdescribes the stated evidence.
- CCorrect
This reveals another problem in the comparison: what do the reliable records actually show? I initially read “reliably indicating their degree of safety” as though it meant “showing they are safe.” It doesn't. A long, reliable record could document that an airline is unsafe. More reliable knowledge of a safety level doesn't guarantee that the level is high. The argument never supplies that missing information about the major airlines.
- D
The argument doesn't infer good recordkeeping from being safe. It says the major airlines have long-standing records, then draws a conclusion about their safety relative to newer airlines. D assigns a different connection to the argument.
- E
Being safer doesn't mean being incapable of an accident. A major airline could still have an accident while posing less risk than another airline. The conclusion is comparative, so pointing out that even established airlines may crash doesn't identify the central gap.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.