Logical Reasoning

PT131 · S3 · Q14 Economist: A country's trade

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

Economist: A country's trade deficit may indicate weakness in its economy, but it does not in itself weaken that economy.

Conclusion

Restricting imports to reduce a trade deficit would be like putting a thermometer in cold water in the hope of bringing down someone's fever.

Evidence

A trade deficit measures a weakness in an economy, but a trade deficit doesn't itself hurt the economy.

Evaluation

How would we characterize the technique of reasoning? The author definitely uses an analogy in the conclusion (which is atypical; usually there's an analogy in the evidence).

Goal

Look for something that matches the argument, probably in the realm of .

14.

The economist's argument employs which one of the following techniques?

claiming that a crucial assumption
Out of Scope
Out of Scope: "claiming a crucial assumption" There are assumptions people might be making that are kinda insinuated by the author's conclusion, but this answer choice is saying that the argument claimed something about a crucial assumption, which is not true.
1% picked this
demonstrating that an analogy explicitly
Doesn't Find Fault With Analogy
The author is the one presenting an analogy. She accepts the truth of the analogy (which, confusingly, shows two situations in which people would be using faulty logic). Also, the analogy is in her conclusion, it's not being used by someone else to establish their conclusion.
12% picked this
Correct
appealing to an analogy in
Why this is right
Yes, the author is saying that restricting imports as a means of reducing your trade deficit would be just as futile as dipping a thermometer into cold water as a means of reducing someone's fever.
Skill tested: Method · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
86% picked this
calling into question the authority
Out of Scope
Out of Scope: "the authority on which a claim is based" Was there some claim made that was supported by an authority? No. There's no part of the argument that sounds anything like the author impugning the expertise of a someone who supported a given claim.
0% picked this
showing that a recommended course
Too Strong: "disastrous consequences"
Not sure what we could possibly match up with "disastrous consequences". He's just saying that a given approach wouldn't work, not that it leads to the apocalypse.
0% 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