easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A policy analyst argues: nations that spend more on education have higher gross domestic products. Therefore, if our nation increases its education spending, its gross domestic product will rise.
The analyst's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the ground that it:
- neglects to specify which particular kinds of public expenditure ought to count as 'education spending'
- infers that one variable produces another from evidence that the two merely accompany each other.
- ignores that a nation's gross domestic product can also be influenced by its international trade
- presumes that education spending is the single most important line item in any nation's budget
- fails to acknowledge that gross domestic product is an imperfect gauge of national prosperity
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- 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