LSAT Explanation PT 41, S1, Q25: Gas station owner: Increased fuel efficiency

LSAT Question Stem

The reasoning in the gas station owner's argument is flawed because the argument 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the structure of the argument in the passage. The gas station owner presents the following premises:

1. Increased fuel efficiency reduces air pollution and dependence on imported oil.

2. Some people suggest making cars smaller to increase their fuel efficiency.

3. Smaller cars are more likely to be seriously damaged in collisions and provide less protection for their occupants.

From these premises, the gas station owner draws the conclusion:

4. Manufacturers should not seek to increase fuel efficiency.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Are there other ways to increase fuel efficiency without making cars smaller?"

Now, let's discuss the question type and the answer choices. The question type is a Flaw question, asking us to identify the flaw in the gas station owner's reasoning.

a) This answer choice suggests that the argument assumes it's impossible to reduce the likelihood of dangerous accidents for small cars. While this assumption might be present in the argument, it doesn't directly address the main flaw in the reasoning. The argument's main issue is that it dismisses the entire goal of increasing fuel efficiency based on one potentially problematic method.

b) This is the correct answer. The argument is flawed because it concludes that since one means (making cars smaller) to increase fuel efficiency is unacceptable, the entire goal of increasing fuel efficiency should not be pursued. The argument fails to consider other potential ways to increase fuel efficiency without making cars smaller.

c) This answer choice suggests that the argument is flawed because it draws a conclusion about what should be done based on factual premises only. However, this is not the main issue with the argument. The primary flaw lies in the dismissal of the entire goal of increasing fuel efficiency based on one potentially problematic method.

d) This answer choice claims that the argument presupposes the truth of what it sets out to prove. However, this is not the case, as the argument does not assume its conclusion in its premises. The main flaw is the dismissal of the entire goal of increasing fuel efficiency based on one potentially problematic method.

e) This answer choice suggests that the argument assumes that increasing fuel efficiency is the only way to reduce air pollution. While the argument does discuss air pollution, it does not presume that fuel efficiency is the only solution. The main flaw in the argument is the dismissal of the entire goal of increasing fuel efficiency based on one potentially problematic method.

In conclusion, the correct answer is B. The argument is flawed because it concludes that since one means (making cars smaller) to increase fuel efficiency is unacceptable, the entire goal of increasing fuel efficiency should not be pursued.