Logical Reasoning

PT5 · S1 · Q3 Mayor of Plainsville: In order to help

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

Mayor of Plainsville: In order to help the economy of Plainsville, I am using some of our tax revenues to help bring a major highway through the town and thereby attract new business to Plainsville.

Conclusion

The mayor must have non-economic motives.

Evidence

If you were really interested in helping the economy, you'd build a new business park with that money.

A business park would bring in twice the business that your highway would.

Evaluate

In terms of Missing Links, this argument seems to think,

If we were trying to argue the Anti-Conclusion that "the mayor has only economic motives", then how would we respond to citizen saying,

Maybe we'd say, "economic motives can't be measured purely in terms of amount of business they bring in. Maybe there are indirect economic benefits of a highway beyond bringing in businesses (like maybe there's some rebate we can get from the government for building the road, but not for building the business park.

Goal

Look for something linking the evidence to the conclusion or something ruling out a potential objection.

3.

The argument by the citizens’ group relies on which one of the following assumptions?

  1. Plainsville presently has no major

    Bad Assumption

    If we negated this and said, "This city doesn't have a major highway yet!", that might feel like a way to defend the mayor, and weaken the citizen. But the citizen isn't saying we shouldn't build a highway. She's only saying that part of the motive for doing so must be non-economic, because the more economically beneficial option is the business park. When it comes to comparing the economic benefits of the proposed highway vs. the proposed business park, it makes no difference whether we already have a highway. We wouldn't be able to stretch "we don't currently have a major highway" to mean "the proposed highway would bring in at least as much business as the business park would."

    1% picked this

  2. Correct

    The mayor accepts that a

    Why this is right

    This is a super weird answer that is essentially saying, "the mayor would agree with the citizen's premise." If we negated this, it would weaken. We'd be saying, "The mayor is trying to build this major highway for purely economic reasons." The author would say, "But in terms of pure economics, a new business park brings in twice as much. So clearly the mayor has some other motive." And then the negation of this answer would respond, "The mayor does not believe that a new business park would bring in twice as much. The mayor doesn't even believe a business park would bring in any more money than this proposed highway. So he is choosing the highway for purely economic reasons." The negation feels like it weakens by essentially denying the citizen its premise: nuh-uh. The business park would not bring in more money. That's very rare, but it does sometimes happen.

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

    51% picked this

  3. The new highway would have

    Too Strong

    Too Broad (no other benefits) Opposite (if anything) This would be a correct answer if it said, "the new highway has no other economic benefits besides bringing in new business". But the citizen is basically assuming that the highway does have some other benefits, some non-economic ones. That's actually what the citizen is arguing for. She's saying, "There must be some non-economic benefits you get from this highway, since it wouldn't win on a purely economic level." So this would kind of weaken her argument.

    21% picked this

  4. The mayor is required to

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope (approval) / Too Strong (required) Whether the mayor needs city council is totally coming from nowhere. This debate is just about whether the proposed highway is really something you could choose over the new business park, for purely economic reasons. Whether the mayor needs approval or doesn't won't help us assess that at all.

    1% picked this

  5. Plainsville's economy will not be

    Too Strong

    The citizen is merely saying the business park would bring in more business than the new highway. She never commits to any extreme position that the business park is the only way the economy can be helped. She thinks the highway would also help, just half as much.

    27% 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