LSAT Explanation PT 33, S3, Q15: Scientists hoping to understand and eventually

LSAT Question Stem

The reasoning in the environmentalists' criticism is questionable because it 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is A. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The environmentalists criticize the scientists for using a spacecraft to conduct experiments, as they believe that a single trip by the spacecraft does as much harm to the ozone layer as a year's pollution by the average factory. The environmentalists argue that because the pollution caused by the factory is unjustifiable, so is the use of the spacecraft. The conclusion of the argument is that the use of the spacecraft is unjustifiable.

Now, let's come up with an "Evaluate" question about the argument: "Does the potential benefit of the spacecraft experiments outweigh the harm caused to the ozone layer?"

The question type of this problem is Flaw, and we are asked to identify the flaw in the environmentalists' reasoning.

a) This answer choice is correct. The environmentalists' reasoning is flawed because they treat the spacecraft experiments and the factory pollution as similar cases when they are different in a critical respect. While both cause harm to the ozone layer, the spacecraft experiments have the potential to help scientists understand and eventually reverse the damage to the ozone layer, whereas the factory pollution does not.

b) This answer choice is incorrect because the environmentalists' argument does not justify a generalization on the basis of a single instance. They are comparing the harm caused by the spacecraft to the harm caused by the average factory, not making a generalization about all experiments or all factories.

c) This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not confuse the goal of reversing harmful effects with the goal of preventing those harmful effects. The argument is about whether the use of the spacecraft is justifiable given the harm it causes, not about the goals of the scientists or the environmentalists.

d) This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does attempt to compare two quantities that are comparable in terms of the harm they cause to the ozone layer. The flaw in the comparison is not that the quantities are not comparable in any way, but that the environmentalists fail to consider the potential benefits of the spacecraft experiments.

e) This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not presuppose that experiments always do harm to their subjects. The environmentalists are specifically criticizing the harm caused by the spacecraft experiments, not making a claim about all experiments.

In conclusion, the correct answer is A, as the environmentalists' reasoning is flawed because they treat the spacecraft experiments and the factory pollution as similar cases when they are different in a critical respect.