LSAT Explanation PT 37, S4, Q24: Robert: Speed limits on residential streets

LSAT Question Stem

The relationship of Sheila's statement to Robert's argument is that Sheila's statement 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Method of Reasoning question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. Robert presents a problem: speed limits on residential streets in Crownsbury are routinely ignored, endangering pedestrians. He also mentions a limitation: the city does not have enough police officers to patrol every street. Based on this, he concludes that the city should install speed bumps and warning signs to slow down traffic. This is the conclusion of the argument.

Sheila responds to Robert's conclusion by stating that installing speed bumps is a bad idea because drivers who are speeding can easily lose control of their vehicles when they hit a speed bump. This is her counterargument to Robert's conclusion.

Now, let's identify the question type and what it's asking us to do. The question type is Method of Reasoning (MOR), and it asks us to determine the relationship of Sheila's statement to Robert's argument.

Let's analyze each answer choice:

a) Sheila does not raise an objection that the problem Robert is concerned with may not be as serious as he thinks. She agrees that speeding is a problem but disagrees with his proposed solution.

b) This answer choice argues that the solution Robert advocates is likely to have undesirable side effects of its own. This is in line with Sheila's statement, as she believes that installing speed bumps could lead to drivers losing control of their vehicles, which is an undesirable side effect.

c) Sheila does not defend an alternative course of action as more desirable than the one advocated by Robert. She only critiques his proposed solution.

d) Sheila does not concede that the solution advocated by Robert would be effective. In fact, she argues that it could make the situation worse.

e) This answer choice states that Sheila charges that Robert's proposal would have no net effect on the problem he describes. However, this is not what Sheila is saying. She is arguing that the proposal could have negative consequences, not that it would have no effect at all.

Based on our analysis, the correct answer is B. Sheila's statement argues that the solution Robert advocates is likely to have undesirable side effects of its own, namely that drivers who are speeding can easily lose control of their vehicles when they hit a speed bump.