easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A business consultant argues that Company X must upgrade its servers. Just as an aging athlete requires more recovery time and specialized equipment to maintain performance, an aging server network requires hardware upgrades to handle modern data loads.
The consultant's argument proceeds by
- transferring a familiar pattern from one domain to a structurally similar case in order to back a recommendation.
- marshaling statistics on the failure rates of older equipment to justify replacement.
- presenting a single instance that refutes a sweeping claim about how long technology lasts.
- casting doubt on the competence of the staff charged with maintaining the system.
- establishing a strict cause-and-effect law linking equipment age to inevitable breakdown.
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?