easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The city can reduce downtown congestion in one of two ways: by widening its roads or by improving public transit. Widening the roads in the historic downtown would require demolishing several landmark buildings, an option the public strongly opposes. Improving public transit faces no comparable obstacle. The city should therefore address its congestion problem by improving public transit.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?
- Improving public transit will cost less than widening roads through downtown.
- The city should address its congestion problem by improving public transit.
- Widening the historic downtown's roads would require demolishing several landmark buildings.
- The city should never widen any of its roads under any circumstances.
- The city can reduce downtown congestion either by widening roads or by improving public transit.
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?