easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The museum should retain timed entry. Lines became shorter, and the number of visitors served did not fall.
The argument proceeds by
- deducing the recommendation from the definition of a single term without relying on observed consequences
- rejecting the opposing recommendation solely because its speaker may be biased or personally interested
- using one individual’s experience as conclusive proof about every member of a much larger group
- showing that two competing positions directly contradict one another and therefore cannot both be accepted
- citing observed benefits and no stated offsetting harm to support the policy
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 these statements?
- 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?