LSAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- georxia
-
Thanks Received: 0
- Forum Guests
- Posts: 6
- Joined: November 10th, 2012
Q4 - McBride: The proposed new fuel
I'm having trouble untangling answer choice C. And why is A incorrect? Doesn't Leggett show that opposing the new fuel-efficiency standard would increase chances of serious injury.
-
- noah
-
Thanks Received: 1192
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 1541
- Joined: February 11th, 2009
Re: Q4 - McBride: The proposed new fuel
The stimulus for this question is an argument:
McBride says we shouldn't pass new standards that encourage cars to be smaller, because when there's a car crash between a small and big car, the occupants of the car are going to get much more hurt than they would have had they also been in a big car.
Leggett (and I love these names) counters that we should pass the new standards because if an accident occurs between two small cars, then nobody will get very hurt.
The second question of this set asks us to describe what Leggett does. Let's work wrong-to-right:
(A) is perhaps tempting if you thought we're describing the entire argument, but we're only describing what Leggett does. Leggett doesn't say that McBride says contradictory statements. That would look like: "McBride, you're full of it! First you say that tomatoes are a fruit, then you say we should place them in the vegetable area. Come on!"
Eliminate.
(B) looks good. Leggett is saying we should get all small cars. Defer.
(C) also looks good. Leggett is talking about an accident with only small cars, McBride is talking about accidents with a small and a big one. Defer.
(D) is out. Nobody is saying that anyone has incorrect facts.
(E) is silly. There's nothing supporting this.
Down to (B) and (C)!
(B) is pretty strong. Does Leggett suggest that McBride say that ALL cars are either one or the other? Actually, that's definitely not what McBride says. McBride talks about accidents between the two, so the possibility of a mixed car world is on the table for McBride (though perhaps a possibility that McBride--no doubt a Hummer employee--would like to see curtailed!).
(C) is our winner! McBride talks about how the new law would increase the number of small cars that could hit big cars, while Leggett imagines the law will reduce the number of big cars that could hit the small cars.
And, is it just me, or does "McBride" sound like a tasty new fast food product?
McBride says we shouldn't pass new standards that encourage cars to be smaller, because when there's a car crash between a small and big car, the occupants of the car are going to get much more hurt than they would have had they also been in a big car.
Leggett (and I love these names) counters that we should pass the new standards because if an accident occurs between two small cars, then nobody will get very hurt.
The second question of this set asks us to describe what Leggett does. Let's work wrong-to-right:
(A) is perhaps tempting if you thought we're describing the entire argument, but we're only describing what Leggett does. Leggett doesn't say that McBride says contradictory statements. That would look like: "McBride, you're full of it! First you say that tomatoes are a fruit, then you say we should place them in the vegetable area. Come on!"
Eliminate.
(B) looks good. Leggett is saying we should get all small cars. Defer.
(C) also looks good. Leggett is talking about an accident with only small cars, McBride is talking about accidents with a small and a big one. Defer.
(D) is out. Nobody is saying that anyone has incorrect facts.
(E) is silly. There's nothing supporting this.
Down to (B) and (C)!
(B) is pretty strong. Does Leggett suggest that McBride say that ALL cars are either one or the other? Actually, that's definitely not what McBride says. McBride talks about accidents between the two, so the possibility of a mixed car world is on the table for McBride (though perhaps a possibility that McBride--no doubt a Hummer employee--would like to see curtailed!).
(C) is our winner! McBride talks about how the new law would increase the number of small cars that could hit big cars, while Leggett imagines the law will reduce the number of big cars that could hit the small cars.
And, is it just me, or does "McBride" sound like a tasty new fast food product?
2 posts Page 1 of 1