A company produced a small car

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsParadox

Keep going in LSAT Lab

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

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

A company produced a small car that costs much less—but is also much less safe—than any car previously available. However, most customers of the new car roads by buying it.

What this question is testing

Paradox

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent paradox in

Answer choices

Opposite1% picked this
The company surveyed potential customers and discovered that most of them were more concerned about
Opposite If potential customers are more concerned about cost than safety, this doesn't explain how they increase their safety on the roads. If anything, it indicates that they would be less safe.
1%
No Impact1% picked this
The company could significantly increase the car’s safety without dramatically increasing
Something that the company "could" do doesn't impact what has already happened. The stimulus indicates that customers have already increased their safety by buying the car.
1%
Opposite (if anything)2% picked this
Most people who bought the new car were probably unaware that it is much less
It's not clear how this impacts the apparent paradox of customers increasing their safety by buying this car. If anything, being unaware of the safety issue would make them less likely to drive more carefully, which would be the opposite of what we're looking for.
2%
Opposite (if anything)0% picked this
Many households that previously could afford only one car can now
This would seem to mean that it's easier for someone to buy one of these cars, even if they already have a car. It's not clear how that would help people who own the new car increase their safety. This could also mean that families are buying more than one of these rolling death traps, which might be the opposite of what we're looking for, if anything.
0%
Correct96% picked this
Most people who bought the new car previously travelled by bicycle or motorcycle, which are less safe
Why this is right
The stimulus compares the new small car to "any car previously available," but doesn't state how safe the new car is compared to other forms of transportation, like riding a bicycle or motorcycle. If this answer choice is true, people who buy the new car are safer because they're no longer using more dangerous methods of transportation. Wear your helmets, kids.
Skill tested: Paradox · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
96%

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