Logical Reasoning

PT157 · S2 · Q10 The Industrial Revolutiuon decreased

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

The Industrial Revolution decreased the value that society conferred on physical labor because it enabled unskilled workers to quickly produce goods that formerly took skilled craftspeople long periods of time to produce.

Conclusion

Our most important intellectual skills will be devalued by electronic data-processing technology [similar to the way that the Industrial Revolution decreased the value that society conferred on physical labor].

Evidence

The Industrial Revolution decreased the value that society conferred on physical labor because it enabled unskilled workers to quickly produce goods that formerly took skilled craftspeople long periods of time to produce.

Computations that once took skilled mathematicians a long time to perform can now be quickly performed by moderately well-trained high school students using computers.

Evaluate

This is an argument by Analogy.

Since X happened in this situation, X will happen similarly in this other situation.

How do we weaken an argument that is based on presumed similarities? We point to salient differences.

If we're trying to argue that, , we could try to argue that the situation with physical skills is not the same as intellectual skills.

We could say that "our most important intellectual skills" are things like creativity and nuance, which are harder for machines to replace.

Or we could just say that society has changed in terms of how they place value on work. It might no longer be the case that .

The argument makes a significant leap by discussing mathematical computations in the evidence and "our most important intellectual skills" in the conclusion. Aren't other types of intellectual skills important? Aren't reading and logical reasoning skills, such as those tested on the LSAT, also important?

Goal

Look for an answer highlighting a difference between machines replacing human physical skilled labor and machines replacing human intellectual skilled labor.

Or look for an answer reacting to this New Concept in the Conclusion (our "most important intellectual skills") and digging into the idea that those are outside the province of what machines can replace.

10.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

  1. Much industrial machinery is now

    Opposite

    This is sort of just an Idea Salad, blending the two halves of the analogy by saying that computers (the threat to replace our intellectual skills) are building machines (the thing that replaced our physical skills). But if anything, this makes computers sound hella capable. We want to be able argue more in the direction of "computers will not replace humans!".

    1% picked this

  2. Before electronic data-processing technology, improvements

    Unclear Impact

    We need to argue that "what's coming, in regards to computers and intellectual skills, is NOT gonna be like what happened with machines and crafting skills." This isn't aimed anywhere near there. It's saying, "You know what used to help human mathematicians, back in the day before data-processing technology arrived? Improved techniques. Improved techniques saved us time with our computations." That's great, Grandpa. But data processing has arrived now. And we're trying to talk about whether it's going to degrade human's most valuable intellectual skills.

    10% picked this

  3. On average, skilled mathematicians tend

    Unclear Impact

    This making a distinction between the two halves of the analogy, but a completely meaningless one. We don't care at what age mathematicians vs. craftspeople are most productive. We're only trying to assess whether in both cases machines will be able to replace them and that their work will thus be devalued by society.

    2% picked this

  4. Correct

    The intellectual skills that society

    Why this is right

    This weakens by making the author's evidence irrelevant to its conclusion. The conclusion is about technology replacing and devaluing "our most important intellectual skills", but the author's only premise is about technology replacing computational skills. If computational skills have nothing to do with "our most highly valued intellectual skills", then that 'premise' isn't relevant at all, so the author hasn't provided any evidence to support her idea that technology will replace/devalue our most important intellectual skills.

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

    73% picked this

  5. Electronic data-processing technology has enabled

    Opposite

    This answer, like (A), is making it seem like technology is bad ass and mad capable. We want to be able to argue the opposite, if anything. We'd be trying to argue that technology won't be able to replace/degrade our most important intellectual work.

    14% 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