Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT12 S4 Q4 Explanation

The region's water authority is

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

TopicsWeaken

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

The region’s water authority is responding to the current drought by restricting residential water use. Yet reservoir levels are now at the same height they were during the drought ten years ago when no restrictions were necessary. Therefore, imposing restrictions now is clearly premature.

What this question is testing

Weaken

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion less likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that look negative but attack a claim the argument never relied on.

Winning move

Find the assumption the argument depends on, then pick the choice that undermines it.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
4.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously calls the conclusion

Answer choices

  1. Opposite Impact7% picked this

    There are now more water storage reservoirs in the region than there were

    This speaks to something that's changed, but if there are more water reservoirs now, then it's harder for us to argue that we need to impose water restrictions.

  2. Correct85% picked this

    The population of the region is approximately three times greater than it was

    Why this is right

    This statement highlights a dramatic change in water demand due to a larger population. Even though reservoir levels are the same, a greater population would likely consume more water, so we can say that our situation now is more dire than it was ten years ago.

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

  3. Opposite Impact4% picked this

    The region currently has more sources outside the drought-stricken area from which to draw water than it

    This speaks to something that's changed, but if there are more sources for water than there were ten years ago, then it's harder for us to argue that we need to impose water restrictions.

  4. Opposite Impact3% picked this

    The water-consuming home appliances and fixtures sold today are designed to use water more efficiently than those

    Another distinction that means we're better off when it comes to water use now than we were ten years ago. This suggests that water usage in households could be more efficient now, diminishing the need for restrictions rather than supporting it.

  5. Opposite (if anything)1% picked this

    The price of water for residential use is significantly higher in the region than it is in regions

    If the price of water is high in this region, then people will be motivated to consume less water, which makes it harder for us to say we need to impose water restrictions.

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