LSAT Explanation PT 26, S3, Q16: The recently negotiated North American Free

LSAT Question Stem

The argument proceeds by 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Method of Reasoning question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is D. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's analyze the argument in the passage. The passage argues that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) among Canada, Mexico, and the United States is misnamed because it would not result in truly free trade. The author cites the principles of free trade articulated by economist Adam Smith, who held that any obstacle placed in the way of the free movement of goods, investment, or labor would defeat free trade. The author then points out that under NAFTA, workers would be restricted by national boundaries from seeking the best conditions they could find, which would obstruct the flow of trade and be harmful from a free-trade perspective. The structure of the argument is as follows:

- Premise: Adam Smith's principles of free trade state that any obstacle placed in the way of the free movement of goods, investment, or labor would defeat free trade.

- Premise: Under NAFTA, workers are restricted by national boundaries from seeking the best conditions they could find.

- Conclusion: Therefore, NAFTA is misnamed and would not result in truly free trade.

Now, let's discuss the question type and the answer choices. The question type is "Method of Reasoning" (MOR), which asks us to identify how the argument proceeds.

a) Ruling out alternatives: The argument doesn't proceed by ruling out alternatives. Instead, it cites Adam Smith's principles and applies them to NAFTA to show why it's misnamed.

b) Using a term in two different senses: The argument doesn't use a term in two different senses. It consistently uses the term "free trade" in the same sense throughout the passage.

c) Citing a nonrepresentative instance: The argument doesn't cite a nonrepresentative instance. It cites Adam Smith's principles of free trade and applies them to NAFTA, which is a representative instance of a trade agreement.

d) Appealing to a relevant authority: Correct. The argument proceeds by appealing to Adam Smith, a relevant authority on free trade, and his principles. It then applies these principles to NAFTA to show that it's misnamed and would not result in truly free trade.

e) Responding to a different issue from the one posed: The argument doesn't respond to a different issue from the one posed. It directly addresses the issue of whether NAFTA would result in truly free trade and concludes that it wouldn't.

So, the correct answer is (D).