- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 904
- Joined: Apr 11, 2011
- Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:40 pm
#38838
Taken from: lsat/viewtopic.php?f=599&t=5662
Weaken—CE. The correct answer choice is (D)
The stimulus commits the classic error of assuming that because two events occur simultaneously that one must cause the other. The phrase used to indicate causality is “responsible for.”
Answer choice (A): This answer presents another effect of the cause, but this additional effect does not weaken the argument. To analogize this answer to a different argument, imagine a scenario where a speaker concludes that playing football makes a person more prone to sustaining a leg injury. Would suggesting that playing football makes a person more prone to a head injury (another effect) undermine the first statement? No.
Answer choice (B): This is an Opposite answer that supports the conclusion. By showing that the key information did not disappear prior to the appearance of the anticollision device, the argument is strengthened because the likelihood that the device is at fault is increased.
Answer choice (C): This information has no effect on determining if the device causes the information to disappear from the screen because it references an event that has yet to occur.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice, and this answer falls into the third category for weakening a causal argument: “Show that although the effect exists, the cause did not occur.” In this instance, the effect of information disappearing from the screen occurred prior to the creation of the supposed causal agent, the anticollision device.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice has no impact on the argument. We cannot make a judgment based on the size of the airport because the argument did not mention airport size or anything directly related to airport size.
Weaken—CE. The correct answer choice is (D)
The stimulus commits the classic error of assuming that because two events occur simultaneously that one must cause the other. The phrase used to indicate causality is “responsible for.”
- D = anticollision device
SD = sudden disappearance of key information
Cause
Effect
D 
SD
Answer choice (A): This answer presents another effect of the cause, but this additional effect does not weaken the argument. To analogize this answer to a different argument, imagine a scenario where a speaker concludes that playing football makes a person more prone to sustaining a leg injury. Would suggesting that playing football makes a person more prone to a head injury (another effect) undermine the first statement? No.
Answer choice (B): This is an Opposite answer that supports the conclusion. By showing that the key information did not disappear prior to the appearance of the anticollision device, the argument is strengthened because the likelihood that the device is at fault is increased.
Answer choice (C): This information has no effect on determining if the device causes the information to disappear from the screen because it references an event that has yet to occur.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice, and this answer falls into the third category for weakening a causal argument: “Show that although the effect exists, the cause did not occur.” In this instance, the effect of information disappearing from the screen occurred prior to the creation of the supposed causal agent, the anticollision device.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice has no impact on the argument. We cannot make a judgment based on the size of the airport because the argument did not mention airport size or anything directly related to airport size.
Jon Denning
PowerScore Test Preparation
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/jonmdenning
My LSAT Articles: http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/author/jon-denning
PowerScore Test Preparation
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/jonmdenning
My LSAT Articles: http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/author/jon-denning