Logical Reasoning

PT18 · S2 · Q12 In discussing the pros and cons of monetary union

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

In discussing the pros and cons of monetary union among several European nations, some politicians have claimed that living standards in the countries concerned would first have to converge if monetary union is not to lead to economic chaos.

Conclusion

It is false to say that .

i.e. it's possible that living standards don't converge, the European nations form a monetary union, and economic chaos does not result.

Evidence

Within individual countries, you have living standards that don't converge, and economic chaos does not result.

Evaluate

The author disputes a cause/effect connection by pointing to a somewhat different instance in which that cause/effect connection didn't hold.

We could call the evidence a counterexample to a principle, except that there was never an explicit principle, just an implied one that .

We could call the evidence an analogy, because the author is pointing to individual nations' economies as a relevantly similar instance in which the claimed connection between divergent living standards and economic chaos does not hold.

Goal

Pick anything that matches, but it will likely either talk about the author providing a counterexample to the politicians' claim or bringing up an analogous situation in which the supposed cause/effect relationship did not hold.

12.

In attempting to refute the politicians’ claim, the author does which one of the following?

  1. argues that those making the

    Out of Scope: temporal relationship

    This answer is saying that the politicians claim to have observed a temporal (before/after) relationship, but the author says they're wrong about the before/after relationship they think they've observed. We don't have a before/after here. The author is arguing that "those making the claim are mistaken about the inevitability of the causal relationship that they claim will follow".

    12% picked this

  2. presents an earlier instance of

    Out of Scope: earlier instance

    This is very close, but the author's evidence is a somewhat analogous instance in which the predicted consequences did not occur. The author isn't actually presenting an earlier instance of the European nations forming a monetary union and not degrading into economic chaos.

    12% picked this

  3. argues that the feared consequence

    Bad Premise Match

    The author's premise doesn't sound anything like "economic chaos is going to happen no matter what, so you might as well have a monetary union".

    4% picked this

  4. Correct

    gives an example of a

    Why this is right

    The author does indeed provide an example of a state of affairs (individual countries), which the author is assuming to be relevantly similar (i.e. analogous), in which the allegedly incompatible elements (diverging living standards, shared currency, economic stability) coexist.

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

    70% picked this

  5. points out that if an

    Bad Conclusion/Premise Match

    We could probably say that the politicians are making an implicit recommendation (don't form a monetary union until living standards have converged). This answer says that our author said, "Well if we prevent European nations from forming a monetary union before their living standards have converged, then we'll never find out whether you were right or wrong about whether economic chaos would result." Naturally, our author said nothing of the sort.

    1% 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