LSAT Explanation PT 22, S2, Q13: Charles: During recessions unemployment typically rises.

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following most accurately describes how Darla's response is related to Charles's argument? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Method of Reasoning question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is C. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

In this passage, we have an argument between Charles and Darla about the relationship between recessions, unemployment, and air pollution due to automobile exhaust. Charles presents the argument that during recessions, unemployment rises, leading to fewer people commuting in cars and thus, a decrease in air pollution. This is his conclusion. Darla questions this conclusion by bringing up the point that during a recession, fewer people can afford new cars, and older cars emit more pollutants.

To help you understand this argument better, let's consider a simple example. Imagine a town with 100 cars. During a recession, 20 people lose their jobs and stop driving to work. According to Charles, this would mean that air pollution should decrease because there are fewer cars on the road. However, Darla points out that during a recession, people might not be able to afford new cars, so the remaining 80 cars on the road might be older and emit more pollutants. This could potentially offset the decrease in pollution from the 20 cars that are no longer on the road.

Now, let's analyze the answer choices based on the relationship between Darla's response and Charles's argument:

a) Darla's response does not question the truth of Charles's premises (that unemployment rises during recessions and fewer people commute). Instead, she introduces a new consideration that could potentially weaken Charles's conclusion.

b) Darla's claim does not necessarily prove Charles's conclusion false. It introduces a new factor that might affect the relationship between unemployment and air pollution, but it doesn't show that Charles's conclusion is impossible.

c) This is the correct answer choice. Darla's response presents an additional consideration (older cars emitting more pollutants) that weakens the support given to Charles's conclusion by his evidence (fewer people commuting).

d) Darla's response does not argue that Charles's conclusion is true. In fact, she questions the conclusion by introducing a new consideration that could potentially weaken it.

e) Darla does not present an argument that shows Charles's premises support an absurd conclusion. She merely introduces a new factor that could potentially weaken Charles's conclusion.

In summary, the correct answer is (c) because Darla's response presents an additional consideration that weakens the support given to Charles's conclusion by his evidence.