Logical Reasoning

PT146 · S3 · Q11 From 1880 to 2000 Britain’s economy

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

From 1880 to 2000 Britain’s economy grew fivefold, but emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, were the same on a per capita basis in Britain in 2000 as they were in 1880.

Statements (Math-y Pivot)

1880 vs. 2000 Britain's economy 5x bigger but Per capita emissions same

Goal

Since they're giving us a generalization (similar to a Principle), it might be conditional in nature. If you're violating a conditional, then you provide an example in which the left side is true, but the right side isn't true.

If, for example, we had a principle like , this example would be violating it.

Britain's economy was 5 times bigger, but per capita emissions weren't higher.

11.

The claims made above are incompatible with which one of the following generalizations?

  1. A decrease in per capita

    Compatible

    This rule would diagram like this: period of ? no decrease in emissions econ growth An incompatible situation would be one in which it was a period of economic growth, and there was a decrease in per capita emission (PCE). But out situation didn't involve a decrease in PCE.

    4% picked this

  2. Countries whose economies are growing

    Compatible Out of Scope: afford laws

    An incompatible situation for this principle, Growing slowly ? can't afford emissions laws would involve a situation where - the economy was growing slowly and - they could afford to enact emissions laws. The stuff we heard about Britain didn't establish either of those ideas.

    4% picked this

  3. Economic growth initially leads to

    Compatible

    Since Britain's economic growth quintupled, this generalization would expect that emissions would initially go up, but then new technology would save the day and reduce the per capita emissions level. Britain's 1880 emissions level is the same as its 2000 level, but we don't need the emissions level to have been constantly the same throughout those 120 years. This answer choice tells an econ growth / emissions level story that could very well have applied to Britain. It certainly doesn't contradict what happened in Britain. It allows for a period of economic growth eventually ending up at the emissions level where it started.

    8% picked this

  4. As the world’s population grows,

    Out of Scope:

    world population

    5% picked this

  5. Correct

    Economic growth always increases household

    Why this is right

    This is a three part principle, but we will still violate it by showing a situation in which the left side is true, but the right side isn't. econ growth ? more house $ ? higher emissions In Britain, there was economic growth (5x the 1880 economy) but comparable levels of per capita emissions.

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

    79% 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