medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Columnist: The new oversight committee has been criticized for approving the riverfront development despite the environmental concerns that residents raised. But those critics forget that the committee's charter requires it to weigh economic benefits alongside environmental risks. Because the projected jobs and tax revenue were substantial, the committee was right to approve the project even though the concerns were legitimate.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the role played in the columnist's argument by the statement that the residents' concerns were legitimate?
- It is a point the columnist grants to opponents while maintaining that other considerations outweighed it
- It is the central conclusion that the rest of the columnist's argument is designed to support
- It is offered as the primary evidence that the committee acted improperly in approving the project
- It establishes that the residents' concerns were the decisive factor in the committee's final decision
- It demonstrates that the committee failed to satisfy the requirements set out in its own charter
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- 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?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- 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