LSAT Explanation PT 45, S4, Q3: Nylon industry spokesperson: Even though cotton

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the nylon industry spokesperson's reasoning? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Principle question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is E. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

The question type for this problem is Principle. We are asked to find a principle that, if valid, would help justify the nylon industry spokesperson's reasoning.

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The spokesperson claims that some people mistakenly believe that cotton is natural while nylon is not. To counter this belief, the spokesperson presents two premises: (1) nylon's main components come from petroleum and nitrogen, and (2) both petroleum and nitrogen come from natural sources (atmosphere and ancient plants). Based on these premises, the spokesperson concludes that nylon is natural.

Now, let's consider an "Evaluate" question for this argument: "Are the processes used to create nylon from its main components natural?"

With this in mind, let's examine each answer choice:

a) A substance is unnatural only if the function it serves is unnatural.

This answer choice focuses on the function a substance serves, which is not discussed in the stimulus. The argument is about the components of nylon, not its function. Therefore, this choice does not strengthen the argument.

b) A substance is no less natural than the processes used in its production.

This choice might actually weaken the argument since it suggests that we should focus on the production processes of nylon, which might not be natural. The spokesperson's argument does not address the production process, so this choice does not help strengthen the argument.

c) A substance is no more natural than its least natural component.

This choice could either strengthen or weaken the argument, making it incorrect. If nylon has non-natural components, this principle could make nylon non-natural, which would weaken the argument. On the other hand, if all of nylon's components are natural, this principle would strengthen the argument. However, since this answer choice could go either way, it is not the correct choice for strengthening the argument.

d) One substance can be more natural than another if only one is wholly derived from natural substances.

This answer choice focuses on comparing the "naturalness" of substances, which is not the main point of the spokesperson's argument. The argument is about whether nylon is natural, not whether it is more or less natural than another substance. Therefore, this choice does not help strengthen the argument.

e) A substance is natural if the origins of its main components are natural.

This is the correct answer choice. This principle states that if the origins of a substance's main components are natural, then the substance is natural. Since the main components of nylon come from natural sources (petroleum and nitrogen), according to this principle, nylon is natural. If this principle is valid, then the argument is strengthened.

Keep in mind that this question asks us to find a principle that, if valid, would justify the argument, not whether the principle itself is valid or reasonable.