Logical Reasoning

PT129 · S1 · Q10 Letter to the editor: Recently

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

Letter to the editor: Recently, the city council passed an ordinance that prohibits loitering at the local shopping mall.

Evidence

Recently, the city council passed an ordinance that prohibits loitering at the local shopping mall.

The council's declared goal was to eliminate overcrowding and alleviate pedestrian congestion, thereby improving the mall's business and restoring its family-oriented image.

Even when fully implemented, the ordinance would not accomplish them.

Conclusion

Despite these claims, reducing overcrowding and congestion cannot be the actual goals of this measure.

Evaluate

The argument mistakes an outcome for intent. Just because the ordinance would not accomplish the city’s declared goals, does not mean that the those goals were not what the city intended to achieve.

10.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the argument's reasoning?

  1. The argument ignores the possibility

    Out of Scope

    Secondary goals are not relevant to the argument.

    7% picked this

  2. Correct

    The argument takes for granted

    Why this is right

    This points to the difference between the goal (i.e., intention) of an action and the actual outcome of an action.

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

    76% picked this

  3. The argument dismisses a claim

    Wrong Flaw

    This correctly describes a common flaw, but not one committed in the argument. The support for the conclusion is not simply an attack on the city council.

    1% picked this

  4. The argument takes for granted

    Too Strong

    The argument certainly permits the possibility that without accomplishing the stated goals, there may nonetheless be some beneficial effects.

    9% picked this

  5. The argument treats a condition

    Wrong Flaw

    While this is a common flaw, this argument rests on comparative reasoning rather than conditional reasoning.

    7% 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