Logical Reasoning

PT135 · S4 · Q8 Union member: Some members

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

Union member: Some members of our labor union are calling for an immediate strike.

Conclusion

We must not strike now.

Evidence

A strike would cut into our strike fund and would lead to a steep fine, which would be a major financial loss.

Evaluate

Okay, no famous flaws stick out. Let's just try to debate this guy: GIVEN THAT the strike fund would cut into our strike fund / lead to a steep fine, HOW CAN WE STILL ARGUE that we should strike now?

We could say,

We might also say,

Goal

Basically, it seems like we need some answer that allows us to argue that the strike could still be worth it, because a negative isn't really a negative (cutting into the strike fund is fine — it's for strikes), or because a negative could be outweighed by a positive (what we would gain from a strike might be more than what the fine costs).

8.

The union member's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

  1. fails to consider that a

    Not an Objection

    If this were true, it would only add to the reasons we shouldn't strike. We're looking for reasons that we should strike.

    3% picked this

  2. fails to define adequately what

    Never a Flaw

    Flaw answer choices asking us for a specific measurement, exact number, named source, etc. is always wrong. We understand that a "major financial loss", whatever the specific value or percentage of income that is, is a severe financial disincentive. That is all we need to know to judge the logic of this argument.

    1% picked this

  3. Correct

    fails to consider that the

    Why this is right

    This, if true, would definitely be an Objection. Our author's reasoning problem was that he only listed the negatives associated with a given proposal. To logically conclude that we shouldn't do X, we need to acknowledge all the positives and the negatives of doing X and argue that the negatives outweigh the positives. Our author hasn't even acknowledged the potential positives.

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

    86% picked this

  4. takes for granted that the

    Out of Scope: bargaining position

    The author is definitely assuming that the union's financial security is a significant factor in determining whether or not to strike. But the author isn't ever making it seem like the union is trying to use its financial strength as a bargaining position, let alone that it's the most important factor.

    2% picked this

  5. fails to establish that there

    Not Required

    If someone says, "We should immediately move to Brazil", and I want to argue "We should not move to Brazil now", that is only speaking about whether or not we should immediately move to Brazil. This answer is inviting people to read-in too much to "We shouldn't strike now", as though it's suggesting "but we should strike later", but analyzing the truth value of "we should / shouldn't strike now" has nothing to do with later. It just has to do with calculating the pros / cons of striking now, and deciding which side outweighs the other. If I think "we should never drink arsenic", then I also think "we should not drink arsenic now", "we shouldn't drink it tomorrow", "we shouldn't drink it at 4:30 on a Tuesday", etc. If the author's case for not striking now had been that "it would be more prudent to wait for later", then we could use an answer like this. But the author's case for not striking now was, "there are negative consequences". He might think those negative consequences will always persist and thus that the decision to not strike will always persist.

    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