medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Studies show that cities with higher numbers of libraries also have higher literacy rates. However, it would be a mistake to conclude that building more libraries will increase literacy, because the cities with more libraries tend to be wealthier, and wealth is the primary driver of literacy.
In the argument above, the author's claim that wealth is the primary driver of literacy serves which of the following roles?
- It supplies an alternative cause that supports the author's verdict against the library-literacy inference.
- It is the central conclusion that the rest of the passage is designed to establish.
- It is a casual observation invoked merely to illustrate a broader principle.
- It is an opposing position that the author goes on to refute.
- It is the empirical finding from which the entire argument originally proceeds.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?