medium · 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 kinds of expenditure should 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 be influenced by international trade.
- presumes that education constitutes the single most important item in a 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 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?