Industrial adviser: If two new

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

TopicsPrinciple-Conform

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

Free to start

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

Industrial adviser: If two new processes under consideration are not substantially different in cost, then the less environmentally damaging process should be chosen. If, however, a company already employs an environmentally damaging process and retooling for a less damaging process would involve substantial cost, then that company should retool to bring long-term savings substantially greater than the cost.

What this question is testing

Principle-Conform

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question

17.

Which one of the following judgments conforms most closely to the principles described by

Answer choices

Contradiction7% picked this
A new law offering companies tax credits for reducing pollution would enable a company to realize a slight long-term savings by changing to a
The second principle implies that the company should change it’s process only if the retooling is either legally required (it’s not) or likely to bring long-term savings substantially greater than the cost (it won’t).
7%
Contradiction1% picked this
In manufacturing pincushions, a company uses a process that, though legal, has come under heavy public criticism for the environmental damage it causes. The
The second principle implies that the company should change it’s process only if the retooling is either legally required (it’s not) or likely to bring long-term savings substantially greater than the cost (it won’t).
1%
Correct69% picked this
A company is considering two new processes for the manufacture of staples. Process A is more expensive than process B but not substantially so.
Why this is right
The company is considering NP + ~SDC two new processes that are not substantially different in cost. The argument concludes that LED the less environmentally damaging process should be implemented.
Skill tested: Principle-Conform · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
69%
Contradiction3% picked this
Two new processes are being considered for the manufacture of ball bearings. The processes are similar, except that the chemicals used in process A
The first principle applies in this case. There are two new processes under consideration and they are not substantially different in cost. So the less damaging process (process B) should be implemented.
3%
Contradiction19% picked this
A company is considering changing its process for manufacturing shoelaces. The new process is cheaper and less environmentally damaging than the old. Both are
The second principle applies in this case. Since the retooling is neither required by law nor likely to bring long-term savings substantially greater than cost, the company should not switch processes.
19%

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