Logical Reasoning

PT111 · S3 · Q3 Opponents of peat harvesting in

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Opponents of peat harvesting in this country argue that it would alter the ecological balance of our peat-rich wetlands and that, as a direct consequence of this, much of the country’s water supply would be threatened with contamination.

Conclusion

We can safely proceed with peat harvesting (even though some people worry that it would alter our ecology and contaminate our water supply)

Intermediate Conclusion

It wouldn't contaminate our water supply

Evidence (for)

In Ireland, they've peat-harvested for centuries and the water supply is not contaminated.

Evaluate

Since there are technically two conclusions, we could worry about both links:

Does the fact that Ireland has peat-harvested for centuries without water contamination prove that peat-harvesting in this country wouldn't lead to water contamination?

No, because we don't know if Ireland and this country are fair to compare in this regard. Maybe the ecology of Ireland has some advantages that are country lacks when it comes to being able to peat-harvest without contaminating the water.

So we could strengthen the argument by making Ireland and this country more fair to compare.

If we accepted that peat-harvesting wasn't going to contaminate our water, would that prove that it's safe to do peat-harvesting?

No, because water contamination is just one possible threat to ecological safety. Maybe peat harvesting wouldn't contaminate the water but would have some other malign effect.

Goal

Look for an answer making Ireland and this country more fair to compare (what happened there would happen here), an answer ruling out other possible safety concerns of peat-harvesting, or just some other answer that makes us feel like peat-harvesting would be safe.

3.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

  1. Over hundreds of years, the

    No Impact

    This is so broad and so vague, it doesn't add any new information to our peat-harvesting question. This answer seems to be going out of it's way to say nothing, like,"throughout history, things happen and things change, sometimes to the benefit or detriment of certain people".

    2% picked this

  2. Correct

    The original ecology of the

    Why this is right

    This is strengthening the move from Premise to Intermediate Conclusion, since that moved relied on believing that, "If peat-harvesting didn't lead to water contamination in Ireland, then it won't lead to water contamination in this country". This answer makes the two ecological environments seem more fair to compare. We love seeing stronger language on Strengthen / Weaken / Paradox, so virtually identical is lovely.

    Skill tested: Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    90% picked this

  3. The activities of other industries

    No Impact

    This answer has nothing to do with peat-harvesting, so it's irrelevant to our inquiry.

    1% picked this

  4. The peat resources of this

    No Impact

    This is about peat-harvesting, but not about safety or environmental harm. The fact that this country has more peat to harvest than do some other countries certainly helps establish why we would be interested in considering peat harvesting. But it doesn't tell us anything that affects our impression of whether peat harvesting would be safe / would contaminate the water supply.

    3% picked this

  5. The peat-harvesting industry of Ireland

    No Impact

    Just like (D), this answer certainly helps establish a reason why this country would be interested in considering peat harvesting. But it doesn't tell us anything that affects our impression of whether peat harvesting would be safe / would contaminate the water supply.

    3% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free