Logical Reasoning

PT150 · S3 · Q24 Politician: Every regulation currently

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

Politician: Every regulation currently being proposed by the Committee for Overseas Trade will reduce the trade deficit.

Conclusion

Each of the proposed regulations would help the economy.

Evidence

Each of the proposed regulations would reduce the trade deficit, which is so large that it weakens the economy.

Evaluate

Given that each of the proposed regulations would reduce trade deficit, which is so large that it weakens the economy How could we still argue that at least one of the regulations would not help the economy?

Two possible thoughts here: 1. Maybe the regulations have more than one effect. They reduce the trade deficit (which is a good thing), but maybe they stifle foreign investment (a bad thing). So it's hard to say whether their overall effect is helpful to the economy, just because they definitely do one helpful thing for the economy.

2. They stressed that the deficit is so large that it weakens the economy. Maybe some of these proposed regulations would reduce the deficit, but not by much. If the economy is weakened by the fact that the trade deficit is so large, then a tiny reduction might not actually impart any help to the economy, because the trade deficit would still be large.

Goal

Look for an answer talking about other effects of the regulations that would be bad for the economy, or for an answer that says that the reduction they would have on the deficit would not be significant enough to help the economy.

24.

The reasoning in the politician's argument is flawed in that the argument

  1. takes for granted that the

    Out of Scope: increase

    The author has never said or implied anything about the deficit increasing.

    1% picked this

  2. takes for granted that the

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: the only Only Thing Mentioned ? Only Thing The author hasn't said or implied anything that sounds as extreme and restrictive as "this is the only way to reduce the deficit". Just because proposed regulations are the only deficit reducer mentioned doesn't mean anyone is thinking that they're are the only deficit reducer.

    12% picked this

  3. merely appeals to the authority

    Wrong Flaw

    This describes the famous Inappropriate Appeal to Authority. But the author mentions the committee; she doesn't appeal to their authority. She's appealing to the fact that the regulations proposed by the committee would reduce the deficit to argue that the regulations proposed by the committee would help the economy.

    2% picked this

  4. Correct

    fails to consider the possibility

    Why this is right

    This is what our first objection was about. There's a shift from Part to Whole in this argument, by saying that because the regulations will help part of our economic health positively (the trade deficit part), it'll help our overall economic health positively. But it's possible that the regulations do some helpful things and some unhelpful things, and this answer is raising the valid objection that the negatives may offset, or even outweigh, the positives.

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

    55% picked this

  5. concludes that every regulation in

    Wrong Flaw

    This describes the famous Part vs. Whole flaw. It's very tempting to think this argument is headed that direction, when we see a conclusion that says "Each of the regulations". But we can try to match this answer choice up with the argument and it won't work. Does the author conclude that every regulation in a set has an effect? Yes. She concludes that every regulation will have the effect of "helping the economy". Is the author's evidence a claim that "the set of regulations as a whole will help the economy? No. The evidence is that "Each regulation" will lower the trade deficit.

    30% 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