LSAT Explanation PT 24, S3, Q25: Economist: In order to decide what

LSAT Question Stem

The reasoning in the economist's argument is flawed in that the argument 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is D. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's analyze the passage. The economist is trying to establish that the ozone layer has a calculable monetary value. They argue that since we wouldn't spend all of the world's economic resources to protect the ozone layer, it must be worth less than that amount, and therefore, it must have a calculable monetary value. The structure of the argument is as follows:

Premise: We would not willingly expend an amount equal to all of the world's economic resources to protect the ozone layer.

Conclusion: The ozone layer has a calculable monetary value.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Does establishing an upper limit on the monetary value of the ozone layer necessarily mean that its monetary value can be calculated?"

Now, let's discuss the question type and answer choices. The question type is Flaw, which asks us to identify the flaw in the reasoning of the economist's argument.

a) This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not compare the ozone layer to other natural resources. It only discusses the monetary value of the ozone layer.

b) This answer choice is also incorrect because the economist does not presuppose that the ozone layer should not be protected. The argument is about determining the monetary value of the ozone layer, not whether it should be protected or not.

c) This answer choice is incorrect because there is no ambiguity in the term "value" in the passage. Both the economist and the environmentalists are discussing monetary value.

d) This is the correct answer. The economist's reasoning is flawed because merely establishing an upper limit on the monetary value of the ozone layer does not necessarily allow for the calculation of its monetary value. Just because we know it's worth less than all the world's economic resources does not mean we can accurately calculate its value.

e) This answer choice is incorrect because the economist does directly address the argument of the environmentalists. The economist is trying to refute the environmentalists' claim that the ozone layer does not have a calculable monetary value.

In summary, the correct answer is D because the economist's argument is flawed in its assumption that establishing an upper limit on the monetary value of the ozone layer allows for the calculation of its monetary value.