Logical Reasoning

PT118 · S4 · Q6 Although we could replace the beautiful

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

Although we could replace the beautiful—but dilapidated—old bridge across Black River with a concrete skyway, we should instead replace it with a cable bridge even though this would be more expensive than building a concrete skyway.

Conclusion (should = opinion)

We should replace the old bridge with a cable bridge, rather than a concrete skyway.

Intermediate Conclusion (clearly)

The extra cost of the cable bridge would be justified.

Evidence

It's important to maintain the beauty of our river crossing.

Evaluate

This argument boils down to a choice between the cable bridge and the concrete skyway. The author identifies some competing interests at play:

concrete skyway - better option when it comes to cost cable bridge - better option when it comes to maintaining the beauty of our river crossing.

How could we object to the decision to go with the cable bridge? Maybe it's way less safe than the concrete skyway? Could safety concerns override beauty concerns?

Goal

We're probably going to get a Defender style correct answer, where it's ruling out some objection to the cable bridge, for example: - the cable bridge is not far more prone than is a concrete skyway to catastrophic collapse

Otherwise let's just pick something that relates to how the author is weighing these tradeoffs between cost and beauty.

6.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

  1. It is no more costly

    Too Strong: no more costly

    It wouldn't hurt the author's argument if a cable bridge is more expensive to maintain. Yes, that's a bad thing about cable bridges, and bad things about cable bridges will generally weaken his argument. But, he's already acknowledged that the cable bridge costs more. He thinks that cost is less important than maintaining beauty. So telling him that the cable costs more to maintain will just get a response of, "I know --- but clearly it's worth it, given the important of maintaining beauty."

    2% picked this

  2. A concrete skyway would not

    Too Strong: no advantages

    The author doesn't need the concrete skyway to have zero advantages. It could have some advantages, as long as they're lame ones. If we negate this and say that "a concrete skyway would have at least one practical advantage over a cable bridge", does that weaken? Yes, a little. That cuts against the conclusion that we should build the cable bridge rather than the concrete skyway. But it's not really a compelling objection until we know that the practical advantages we're referring to here outweigh the very compelling concern the author has with maintaining beauty. If this answer said, "A concrete skyway would not have any practical advantages for which it would be worth sacrificing beauty", then we'd definitely pick it. But if we judge these five answers by the standard of, "Which answer, if negated, most weakens", then this is not the winning objection.

    2% picked this

  3. The beauty of the river

    Too Strong: must be

    The author has already established that "it's important to maintain the beauty of our river crossing", but this answer is saying something stronger. It's an absolute must. There's a difference between saying - it's important to brush your teeth every night and saying - you must brush your teeth every night

    15% picked this

  4. If the new cable bridge

    Too Strong: most people

    Would it hurt the author's argument if a new cable bridge were built, and only 49% of people who see it think the extra money is well spent? Does it need to be at least 51% of people having that reaction? No, so the author doesn't need for most people who see it to have that reaction. The word "most" is wrong on Necessary Assumption 99% of the time we see it. Furthermore, it could be that the vast majority of people have no idea that the cable bridge cost "extra money". They not be privy to the city planning conversation about "cable bridge or concrete skyway".

    1% picked this

  5. Correct

    Building a cable bridge across

    Why this is right

    The author is trying to decide on cable vs. concrete. Concrete is cheaper, but it's important to maintain the beauty of the river crossing. So let's go with cable. That implies that the author thinks that cable is better than concrete, when it comes to maintaining the beauty of the river crossing. If we negated this and said, "the concrete skyway would be at least as aesthetically pleasing as the cable bridge", then we have no reason not to build the cheaper concrete skyway. Negating this answer badly hurts the argument.

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

    80% 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