Logical Reasoning

PT130 · S1 · Q18 Travel agent: Although most

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

Travel agent: Although most low-fare airlines have had few, if any, accidents, very few such airlines have been in existence long enough for their safety records to be reliably established.

Conclusion

Passengers are safer on a major airline than the new low-fare ones.

Evidence

Major airlines have long-standing records reliably indicating their level of safety. New low-fare airlines have had few, if any, accidents, but they haven't been around long enough to have a reliable record of their safety.

Evaluation

Is there a way for us to argue that the low-fare airlines are at least as safe as the major airlines? There's no way to reliably know that a new airline is safe (since they don't have long-standing records), but maybe there are some major airlines that have a long record of being unsafe, and so taking a chance on a low-fare airline could actually be safer than buying a ticket from a major airline with a history of accidents. All the author said is that the major airlines have records that reliably indicate their degree of safety, but these records may indicate that a major airline has a low degree of safety.

The other direction we could take, since this argument is based on a comparison, is to think about what meaningful differences might exist between low-fare and major airlines that could impact safety. For example, if new low-fare airlines have state of the art collision-avoidance technology that major airlines don't have, then we have some reason to suspect that low-fare airlines might be at least as safe, even if we don't have the records to back it up.

Goal

Look for something saying, or something saying .

18.

Of the following, which one is the criticism to which the reasoning in the travel agent's argument is most vulnerable?

  1. The argument fails to address

    Opposite

    Is it a good objection if we say that an average major airline has as many total accidents as an average low-fare airline? No, because the low-fare airlines are news. If they've been flying for much less time but have the same total number of accidents as major airlines, then it sounds like the low-fare ones are less safe, which would strengthen the author's position.

    8% picked this

  2. The argument draws a general

    Bad Premise Match

    Is the author's conclusion about how safe passengers are on different airlines? Sure. Is the evidence about safety records that are all too brief to adequately judge? No. The low-fare airlines' safety records are too brief, but the major airlines usually have long-standing records that reliably indicate degree of safety.

    5% picked this

  3. Correct

    The argument fails to consider

    Why this is right

    Does it hurt the argument if we say that these long-standing and reliable records that the major airlines have indicate that the airlines are unsafe? Yes, that weakens. We still couldn't prove that the low-fare ones are safer, but we at least have the beginnings of a counterargument: maybe it would be safer to take a chance on a lesser-known airline that has so far been pretty safe than to buy a ticket with a major airline that is known to be unsafe.

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

    68% picked this

  4. The argument takes for granted

    Too Strong

    Does this author need to assume that the safest airlines are the most reliable in documenting their safety? No, that's an extreme claim that doesn't matter to the author's logic. He's only arguing that major airlines have better documentation in general and arguing on that basis that they're safer. He doesn't need the #1 safest airline to also be the #1 at reliably documenting their safety. He isn't arguing that "the more reliably you document your safety, the safer you are".

    11% picked this

  5. The argument fails to address

    Too Weak

    Would it hurt the author's argument to say that these major airlines are still likely to have one or more accidents on their record? Not really. The author wasn't making it seem like major airlines had perfect safety records, so the existence of a few accidents on their records isn't anything troubling for this argument. The author is merely saying that major airlines have more established safety records.

    8% 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