easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
An insurance analyst argues that every driver who has been involved in more than three accidents in a year is a reckless driver. The analyst justifies high premiums for these individuals based on this classification.
Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the analyst's argument?
- Some reckless drivers avoided any accidents last year despite frequently speeding and ignoring stop signs.
- A professional test driver had four accidents last year, all caused by mechanical failures in the test vehicles he was evaluating.
- Statistics show drivers under 25 are generally more accident-prone than older drivers.
- High premiums are an effective way to nudge people toward driving more carefully and obeying traffic laws.
- Anyone who has ever been in even one minor accident is the most dangerous person alive.
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?