LSAT Explanation PT 23, S3, Q6: Studies indicate that the rate at

LSAT Question Stem

The reasoning is questionable because it ignores the possibility that 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is E. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

The question type for this problem is a Flaw question, asking us to identify the flaw in the argument's reasoning.

First, let's break down the argument in the passage:

Premise: Studies indicate that the rate at which water pollution is increasing is leveling off (the amount of water pollution caused this year is almost identical to the amount caused last year).

Conclusion: If this trend continues, the water pollution problem will no longer be getting more serious.

The argument assumes that if the rate of water pollution remains constant, the problem will not get worse. However, it ignores the possibility that the effects of water pollution may be cumulative, meaning they could add up over time even if the rate of pollution remains constant.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Do the effects of water pollution accumulate over time?"

Now, let's analyze the answer choices:

a) Some types of water pollution have no noticeable effect on organisms that use the water.

This answer choice does not address the flaw in the argument. If some types of water pollution have no noticeable effect, it doesn't change the assumption that constant pollution rates will not make the problem worse.

b) The types of water pollution caused this year are less dangerous than those caused last year.

This answer choice, while interesting, does not address the flaw in the argument either. Even if the types of pollution are less dangerous, it doesn't change the assumption that constant pollution rates will not make the problem worse.

c) The leveling-off trend of water pollution will not continue.

This answer choice focuses on the possibility of the trend not continuing, rather than addressing the flaw in the argument's reasoning. The argument's flaw lies in the assumption that constant rates of pollution will not make the problem worse, not whether the trend will continue.

d) Air and soil pollution are becoming more serious.

This answer choice is irrelevant to the argument, which focuses on water pollution. It does not address the flaw in the argument's reasoning.

e) The effects of water pollution are cumulative.

This is the correct answer choice. The argument's flaw lies in its assumption that constant rates of pollution will not make the problem worse, ignoring the possibility that the effects of water pollution may accumulate over time. If the effects are cumulative, then even with a constant rate of pollution, the problem could still get worse.