medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A city is planning a new light rail system. Proponents argue it will reduce traffic congestion. Opponents respond that previous expansions of the bus system failed to reduce traffic, and they conclude that the light rail system will likewise fail to reduce traffic.
The opponents' argument relies on assuming which one of the following?
- Whatever caused the bus expansion to fail at cutting traffic is also at work in the light rail proposal.
- Light rail systems cost more to build and maintain than bus systems do.
- Most city residents would rather drive their own cars than use any public transit.
- Reducing traffic congestion is the only legitimate justification for building light rail.
- Light rail and bus systems are identical in every respect relevant to ridership and cost.
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?