Logical Reasoning

PT154 · S4 · Q21 Enginerr: Air bags in automobiles

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

Engineer: Air bags in automobiles occasionally cause injuries by accidentally inflating when no collision has occurred.

Conclusion

The new computer control systems will probably only make the problems with accidental air bag inflation worse.

Evidence

The new system will be more complex, and the more complex a system is, the more ways there are in which it can fail.

Evaluate

The author is essentially making a move from "there are more ways the system can fail" to .

Mathematically, that doesn't have to be true.

Say there are only two ways to fail, and each way of failing has about a 30% chance of occurring.

Avoiding failure would mean that both things go right, which is 70% probability times 70% probability 7/10 * 7/10 = 49/100 = 49% chance it doesn't fail.

No say there are four ways to fail, but each of them only has about a 10% chance of occurring.

Avoiding failure would mean that all four things go right, is 90% * 90% * 90% * 90%. [checks calculator] = 65% chance it doesn't fail.

Goal

Find an answer saying that , or one saying .

21.

The engineer's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?

  1. Correct

    It fails to address adequately

    Why this is right

    Does it weaken the argument to say, "Hey, author, it's possible that the number of ways in which a system can fail increases, but the likelihood of the system failing does not increase"? Yes! That's basically saying, "Hey, author, your conclusion need not follow from your evidence".

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

    59% picked this

  2. It takes for granted that

    Too Strong

    The author doesn't need to assume that every single failure in a control system will cause the air bag to accidentally inflate. If there is at least one component in an air bag's computer control system that doesn't trigger the air bag to inflate when it fails, that wouldn't hurt the author's argument at all.

    21% picked this

  3. It fails to address adequately

    Not an Objection

    Does it weaken the author's argument to say, "Hey, author, even if there were no computer control systems at all, there would still sometimes be accidental inflations." No, because that would only weaken someone who had promised that "if we do X, there will be no more accidental inflations". Our author said, "if we do X (use this more complex system), we're increasing the risk of additional inflations".

    4% picked this

  4. It overlooks the possibility that,

    Even If [Conclusion is True]

    This form of answer choice is always wrong, since you can't hurt an argument by saying, "Even if your Conclusion is right, ______ ." The whole point of an argument is only that the Conclusion is true/correct/right. Once we establish that, the author won the case. If you're defending a client against murder, and you say "even if eddie did commit murder, there are a lot of good things he's done too", you will not be doing anything to help acquit him of murder. This answer choice would weaken an argument that said, "With its more complex design, the new computer control system will increase the risk of accidental air bag inflation. Thus, we should not implement the new design."

    12% picked this

  5. It overlooks the possibility that,

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This is arguing against an author who concluded that we should get rid of air bags. It's objecting to an argument that would sound like this, "The accidental inflation of air bags is responsible for many injuries each year. Thus, it is time for us to get rid of air bags in cars." or "Thus, air bags increase the likelihood of being injured in a car"

    3% 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