Return to Blog Homepage

LR – Councilman

Councilman: The polar ice caps are melting at an astonishing pace due to CO2 emissions. Action must be taken in order to save the polar ice caps and preserve the habitat and its species. Since there is no feasible way to reverse the damage that’s already been done, the only thing we can do is take action to prevent future damage and let the habitat regenerate. I’ve drafted a plan that will shut down industrial plants and reduce CO2 emissions. And so it is clear that we can save the polar ice caps only if we adopt this plan.

The argument’s reasoning is flawed because the argument

A. Relies on information that is far from certain
B. Takes for granted that there is no way to reverse the damage that’s already been done
C. Fails to recognize that methane causes more damage to the polar ice caps than does CO2
D. Inappropriately employs language that is vague when talking about CO2 emissions
E. Confuses being an adequate solution with being a required solution


EXPLANATION: Exclusivity Flaw. Excludes other possibilities that could also save the polar ice caps.

Want to receive daily LSAT practice delivered right into your inbox? Sign up here for our LSAT Question of the Day emails!