Logical Reasoning

PT118 · S1 · Q15 At the request of Grove

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

Start practicing free

At the request of Grove Park residents, speed bumps were installed on all streets in their neighborhood.

Conclusion

It's unfair that they built speed bumps in Grove Park.

Evidence

It's a public community, its streets were built with public funds, and so all drivers have a right to use those streets whenever they want.

Evaluation

Okay .... author, I'm wondering if you realize what "speed bumps" are. They are preventing anyone from using the street. They just encourage people to slow down, because otherwise your car jostles pretty severely if it drives too fast over the bump.

Goal

This seems like an Irrelevant Response, and so LSAT presumably just wants us to react by saying, 'What does having the right to use those streets whenever they want have to do with speed bumps?'

15.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

  1. ignores the possibility that speed

    Not an Objection

    If we interpreted this answer as saying, "Hey, author, anyone can still use the road. You don't have to slow down as you drive through the neighborhood", it would have some pushback, but its force is very weak. And the answer isn't pointing out the logical disconnect between "free to use the road" and "speed bumps". It's just saying speed bumps might not reduce driver speed. That might even be interpreted as HELPING the author. "These speed bumps are unfair AND they're not even going to accomplish their goal!"

    2% picked this

  2. neglects the possibility that drivers

    Not a Reasoning Critique

    This sounds like it's an argument in favor of installing speed bumps, so it's pushing back against our author who thinks that speed bumps are unfair. But this isn't addressing the author's reasoning at all. It doesn't address the issue of whether speed bumps lead to a public road being inaccessible to any drivers.

    8% picked this

  3. provides no evidence that drivers

    Not Necessary

    In order to prove that something is unfair, you don't need to demonstrate that anyone has complained about it being unfair. People might accept unfair treatment stoically and silently. Their lack of protest wouldn't show an absence of wrongdoing.

    2% picked this

  4. contains the tacit assumption that

    Opposite

    This author is saying that a traffic restriction prompted by residents of this neighborhood is unfair. So it doesn't feel like she's tacitly endorsing the idea of resident-sponsored traffic restrictions.

    6% picked this

  5. Correct

    presumes, without providing justification, that

    Why this is right

    Yes, this gets to the Irrelevant Response. What does "speed bumps" have to do with "we all have the right to use these roads"? The author is assuming that speed bumps somehow impinge on people ability to use the roads.

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

    82% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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