Logical Reasoning

PT134 · S3 · Q15 Columnist: Shortsighted motorists learn

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

Columnist: Shortsighted motorists learn the hard way about the wisdom of preventive auto maintenance; such maintenance almost always pays off in the long run.

Conclusion

Our city council should be praised for investing in the future by hiring a long-term economic development adviser.

Evidence

This hiring will likely have a big payoff in several years.

Other cities in this region that have spent money on economic development have earned large returns on their investments.

Evaluation

The author opens with an analogy to set up the praise for long term investment thinking, but his case primarily leans on other local cities having had success with investing in economic development planning.

Since the author's evidence is a Comparison to other cities, we should kick into Comparison mode and think about weakening this argument by pointing to important differences.

Goal

We probably want an answer that helps us argue that

15.

Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the columnist's argument?

  1. Even some cars that receive

    Very Weak

    "Some" means at least one, so this tries to make the objection that investing in preventative maintenance isn't effective 100% of the time. At least one car that had preventative maintenance still needed repairs. Be very wary of "some" / "not all" (any language that only means "at least one") on Strengthen, Weaken, and Paradox.

    21% picked this

  2. Correct

    The columnist's city has a

    Why this is right

    This points out a potentially salient difference between this author's city and the cities she's using as evidence. It's not a super appealing answer in that we don't necessarily have a common sense reason by having a smaller population and economy makes it less likely that you'd benefit from economic development advisers. But, there's some strong language (much smaller pop / economy) that at least creates doubt because we realize we are definitely talking in the author's case about a city that's very different from the ones she is citing as evidence that this strategy will work. When an argument rests on a comparison, we almost always weaken it by pointing out an important difference between the things being compared.

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

    61% picked this

  3. Most motorists who fail to

    Irrelevant / Strengthens

    The opening analogy was not important to the author's argument. But if anything, this answer helps the author. She is trying to use that opening analogy as an example of wise, long-term thinking (paying for preventative maintenance). If it turned out that most people who didn't pay for preventative maintenance just couldn't afford it in the first place, then it wouldn't make the people who did pay for it seem particularly wise, just wealthier.

    5% picked this

  4. Qualified economic development advisers generally

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: willing to spend Too Weak If we learned that this adviser was way more expensive than the ones those other cities hired (if they even hired an adviser), that would weaken by making this author's city seem importantly different. But this answer doesn't tell us about how much this city paid its adviser. It's just about what salaries advisers demand in general. And the fact that what they demand is higher than what many (at least 10?) city councils are willing to spend is not very compelling.

    5% picked this

  5. Cities that have earned large

    Unclear Impact

    This author promises a big payoff in several years, i.e., "In 3 or 4 years, we'll see a big payoff". This detail says that there wasn't a payoff for those other cities in the first 3 years. That's totally compatible with the author's prediction.

    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