Question

Which one of the following, if true, lends the most support to the automakers' current position? (A) The more stringent the legislation restricting emissions becomes, the more difficult it becomes for automakers to provide the required technology economically. (B) Emissions-restriction technology can often be engineered so as to avoid reducing the efficiency with which an automobile uses fuel. (C) Not every new piece of legislation restricting emissions requires new automotive technology in order for automakers to comply with it. (D) The more automobiles there are on the road, the more stringent emission restrictions must be to prevent increased overall air pollution. (E) Unless forced to do so by the government, automakers rarely make changes in automotive technology that is not related to profitability.

Short answer

Option (A) best supports the automakers' position by highlighting economic challenges with stricter emission restrictions.

Step-by-step solution

Identify Automakers' Position

The automakers' current position is that they are opposed to more stringent legislative restrictions on emissions. They likely argue that increased restrictions might have negative implications for them or increase manufacturing challenges.

Connect Each Option to Automakers' Position

Evaluate how each statement might support the automakers' position. - **(A):** This suggests increased regulation makes it harder for automakers economically. - **(B):** This suggests emissions technology can still maintain fuel efficiency. - **(C):** This implies not all emissions laws burden automakers with extra tech needs. - **(D):** Suggests higher emission numbers require stricter laws, affecting production. - **(E):** Shows automakers make tech changes only if profitable.

Analyze Option A

Statement (A) states that when emission restrictions become more stringent, it becomes difficult for automakers to provide the necessary technology economically. This directly supports the automakers' argument by highlighting economic difficulty and technological challenges that come with stricter regulations.

Analyze Option B

Statement (B) suggests that emission-control technologies do not necessarily affect fuel efficiency, which doesn't directly support the automakers' concern about the economic impact of stringent laws.

Analyze Option C

Statement (C) suggests that not all legislative changes require new technology. While this may be true, it doesn’t directly support the automakers' opposition to current or potential legislation.

Analyze Option D

Statement (D) suggests a need for more stringent laws depending on the number of vehicles. While it discusses the context of emission laws, it doesn't address automakers' concerns about technology or economic demands.

Analyze Option E

Statement (E) highlights automakers' reluctance to innovate unless it's profitable. This reflects internal motivators rather than supporting their external argument against stringent emissions legislation.

Determine Best Support

Option (A) is the best support for the automakers' position. It indicates that stricter emission laws directly increase economic and technological challenges for automakers, aligning with their opposition to the legislation.

Key concepts

logical reasoning

Logical reasoning involves using structured thinking to make sense of various arguments or statements. In the context of exam preparations, such as the LSAT, it's crucial to evaluate options that strengthen or weaken a given argument. To practice logical reasoning, one should:

• Identify the main argument or claim made by the speaker.
• Understand the assumptions that underpin the argument.
• Assess alternative views or evidence that could affect the argument's strength.

For example, in a question about legislative impact on automakers, one must think about how each option might affect their argument regarding stricter emission laws. Logical reasoning allows one to systematically and carefully understand how different pieces of evidence contribute to or detract from a given claim.

argument analysis

Argument analysis is about breaking down an argument into its core components and understanding the interaction between these elements. It is a key skill for the LSAT and can help clarify how well an argument holds based on the given evidence. Key steps include:

• Identifying the conclusion - what is the speaker trying to prove?
• Noting the premises - what evidence or statements are presented to support the conclusion?
• Understanding the relationship between premises and conclusion - does the evidence logically lead to the conclusion?

In the context of the given problem, the conclusions: automakers' opposition to stringent legislative restrictions, would benefit from close argument analysis. By examining each statement option, we evaluate how effectively each one reinforces the automakers' stance. The process helps to surface which piece of evidence, or lack thereof, strengthens their position against the restrictions.

critical thinking

Critical thinking is a higher-level cognitive skill used to evaluate and analyze information in a rational way to form a judgment. This skill is essential in LSAT preparation as it requires an individual to go beyond surface-level understanding. Here’s how you can nurture your critical thinking skills:

• Question underlying assumptions - are there biases or assumptions that are not directly stated?
• Look for inconsistencies or contradictions in statements or arguments.
• Consider the implications - if something is true, what follows?

When analyzing the automakers' position on stricter legislation, one must critically assess each choice to determine how well it substantiates or questions their claims. Does a particular choice imply a challenge or an economic burden? Critical thinkers also consider broader consequences, like how a decision affects other stakeholders or future legislation.

legislation impact

Understanding legislation impact involves recognizing how changes in laws affect stakeholders such as businesses, individuals, and the environment. In arguing about emissions legislation, one needs to identify these impacts to shape strong arguments either for or against the changes. Considerations include:

• Economic impact - how do legislative changes affect economic performance or financial strain?
• Technological requirements - what innovations or adaptations are needed to meet new standards?
• Environmental outcomes - how effective are the regulations in protecting or improving the environment?
• Social effects - how do these changes affect society at large?

Analyzing the impact of legislation on automakers requires understanding their claim about difficulties imposed by new emission laws. It means assessing how these laws impact economic viability, available technology, and the environmental benefits intended by these regulations. Drawing comprehensive connections between legislation and its effects sharpens your ability to evaluate arguments critically.