LSAT Explanation PT 41, S3, Q23: Diplomat: Every major war in the

LSAT Question Stem

Of the following, which one most accurately describes a reasoning flaw in the diplomat's argument? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is A. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

In the passage, the diplomat presents an argument that every major war in the last 200 years has been preceded by a short, sharp increase in the acquisition of weapons by the nations involved. The diplomat then concludes that arms control agreements will preserve peace. The structure of the argument can be broken down as follows:

Premise: Every major war in the last 200 years has been preceded by a short, sharp increase in the acquisition of weapons by the nations involved.

Conclusion: Arms control agreements will preserve peace.

The argument is based on a causal relationship, implying that the increase in weapons acquisition causes wars, and therefore, controlling weapons acquisition would prevent wars. However, the argument only establishes a time-based relationship between the two events (weapons acquisition and wars) and not a causal relationship.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be, "Is the increase in weapons acquisition the actual cause of wars?"

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

a) Correct. This answer choice accurately points out the flaw in the argument. The argument infers that since events of one type (weapons acquisition) have consistently preceded events of another type (wars), an event of the second type (war) will not occur unless an event of the first type (weapons acquisition) occurs. The argument assumes a causal relationship without establishing it.

b) This answer choice is incorrect because it misrepresents the argument. The argument does not claim that a rapid increase in weapons acquisition will always lead to war; it only claims that such an increase has preceded major wars in the past.

c) This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not draw a conclusion that simply restates a claim presented in support of that conclusion. The premise and the conclusion are different statements.

d) This answer choice is incorrect because it introduces a new consideration that is not part of the argument's reasoning. The argument's flaw is not related to the reasons behind the increase in weapons acquisition.

e) This answer choice is incorrect because it is also introducing a new consideration (minor wars) that is not part of the argument's reasoning. The argument's flaw is not related to whether minor wars were also preceded by rapid increases in weapons acquisition.

In conclusion, the correct answer is choice A, as it accurately describes the reasoning flaw in the diplomat's argument. The argument assumes a causal relationship between weapons acquisition and wars without properly establishing it.