Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

The United States has never been a great international trader. It found most of its raw materials and customers for finished products within its own borders. The terrible consequences of this situation have become apparent, as this country now owes the largest foreign debt in the world and is a playground for wealthy foreign investors. The moral is clear: a country can no more live without foreign trade than a dog can live by eating its own tail. In order to advance her point of view, the author does each of the following EXCEPT (A) draw on an analogy (B) appeal to historical fact (C) identify a cause and an effect (D) suggest a cause of the current economic situation (E) question the ethical basis of an economic situation

Short Answer

Expert verified
E) question the ethical basis of an economic situation.

Step by step solution

01

Understand the Purpose

The exercise asks us to identify which action the author does NOT take in the passage to advance their point of view.
02

Analyze Each Option

Review the list of options given in the exercise to determine the author's use of each action except one: (A) draw on an analogy, (B) appeal to historical fact, (C) identify a cause and an effect, (D) suggest a cause of the current economic situation, (E) question the ethical basis of an economic situation.
03

Evaluate Author's Actions

Go through the passage and cite evidence for each option: - (A) The author uses the analogy of a dog trying to live by eating its own tail. - (B) The author refers to "The United States has never been a great international trader" as a historical fact. - (C) The author identifies that the lack of international trade led to foreign debt (cause and effect). - (D) The author suggests that lack of trade has caused economic consequences (current situation).
04

Identify the Missing Action

Determine which option is not supported by the passage. Option (E) is left, as there is no indication that the author questions the ethical basis of this economic situation.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Logical Reasoning
Logical reasoning is at the heart of any analytic reasoning task, such as those you might encounter on the LSAT. It involves evaluating information and arguments to draw valid conclusions. In our original exercise, logical reasoning is utilized by the author to create a structured argument based on available evidence.
When you're engaging in logical reasoning, it's crucial to scrutinize each claim to see if it aligns with the conclusions drawn. This helps in picking out which elements of an argument are supported by facts and which are not. In the passage, the author logically deduces that the lack of international trade has contributed to the United States' foreign debt by looking at historical trends and consequences.
  • Logical reasoning often requires understanding the relationship between different claims or statements.
  • It is about identifying how evidence is used to support a particular point of view.
  • Critical thinking is key—ask yourself, "Does the conclusion genuinely follow from the premises?"
Hence, in analyzing such passages, one must always maintain a keen eye for how evidence is structured to support arguments, checking each step in the reasoning process.
Cause and Effect
Understanding cause and effect is vital when dissecting arguments, especially on tests like the LSAT. It means recognizing how one event leads to another. In the passage we are studying, the author emphasizes a cause-and-effect relationship by linking the lack of international trade to the consequences of foreign debt and economic vulnerability.
In essence, cause and effect require identifying an origin or reason for a situation and understanding the outcomes. For example, in the exercise:
  • The cause: "The United States has never been a great international trader."
  • The effect: "[The USA] now owes the largest foreign debt in the world. ."
Understanding these links strengthens your ability to make and scrutinize arguments. The significance of cause and effect is far-reaching—it helps in predicting future outcomes based on past actions and foreseeing the potential impact of present decisions. This skill is particularly useful in crafting strong, evidence-based arguments.
Analogies in Arguments
Analogies are a powerful tool in arguments. They help clarify or emphasize a point by drawing comparisons between two seemingly different things, thus making complex arguments more digestible. The passage uses such a technique to enhance its persuasiveness by comparing a country needing foreign trade to a dog unable to sustain itself on its own tail.
When analyzing an argument that uses an analogy:
  • Understand the underlying similarities it draws attention to.
  • Consider why this particular analogy was chosen—what does it simplify or illuminate?
  • Evaluate its effectiveness in supporting the main argument.
In our exercise, the analogy effectively underscores the necessity of external trade for economic sustenance. A good analogy can simplify elaborate ideas, making them more relatable and understandable to the audience. Thus, mastering how to interpret and employ analogies is crucial for both building and dissecting complex arguments.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Measurements of the extent of amino-acid decomposition in fragments of eggshell found at archaeological sites in such places as southern Africa can be used to obtain accurate dates for sites up to 200,000 years old. Because the decomposition is slower in cool climates, the technique can be used to obtain accurate dates for sites almost a million years old in cooler regions. The information above provides the most support for which one of the following conclusions? (A) The oldest archaeological sites are not in southern Africa, but rather in cooler regions of the world. (B) The amino-acid decomposition that enables eggshells to be used in dating does not take place in other organic matter found at ancient archacological sites. (C) If the site being dated has been subject to large unsuspected climatic fluctuations during the time the eggshell has been at the site, application of the technique is less likely to yield accurate results. (D) After 200,000 years in a cool climate, less than one-fifth of the amino acids in a fragment of eggshell that would provide material for dating with the technique will have decomposed and will thus no longer be suitable for examination by the technique. (E) Fragments of eggshell are more likely to be found at ancient archacological sites in warm regions of the world than at such sites in cooler regions.

More than a year ago, the city announced that police would crack down on illegally parked cars and that resources would be diverted from writing speeding tickets to ticketing illegally parked cars. But no crackdown has taken place. The police chief claims that resources have had to be diverted from writing speeding tickets to combating the city's staggering drug problem. Yet the police are still writing as many speeding tickets as ever. Therefore, the excuse about resources being tied up in fighting drug-related crime simply is not true. The conclusion in the passage depends on the assumption that (A) every member of the police force is qualified to work on combating the city's drug problem (B) drug-related crime is not as serious a problem for the city as the police chief claims it is (C) writing speeding tickets should be as important a priority for the city as combating drug-related crime (D) the police could be cracking down on illegally parked cars and combating the drug problem without having to reduce writing speeding tickets (E) the police cannot continue writing as many speeding tickets as ever while diverting resources to combating drug-related crime

Some people believe that witnessing violence in movies will discharge aggressive energy. Does watching someone else eat fill one's own stomach? In which one of the following does the reasoning most closely parallel that employed in the passage? (A) Some people think appropriating supplies at work for their own personal use is morally wrong. Isn't shoplifting morally wrong? (B) Some people think nationalism is defensible. Hasn't nationalism been the excuse for committing abominable crimes? (C) Some people think that boxing is fixed just because wrestling usually is. Are the two sports managed by the same sort of people? (D) Some people think that economists can control inflation. Can meteorologists make the sun shine? (E) Some people think workaholics are compensating for a lack of interpersonal skills. However, aren't most doctors workaholics?

Although this bottle is labeled "vinegar," no fizzing occurred when some of the liquid in it was added to powder from this box labeled "baking soda." But when an acidic liquid such as vinegar is added to baking soda the resulting mixture fizzes, so this bottle clearly has been mislabeled. A flaw in the reasoning in the argument above is that this argument (A) ignores the possibility that the bottle contained an acidic liquid other than vinegar (B) fails to exclude an altemative explanation for the observed effect (C) depends on the use of the imprecise term "fizz" (D) does not take into account the fact that scientific principles can be definitively tested only under controlled laboratory conditions (E) assumes that the fact of a labeling error is proof of an intention to deceive

All intelligent people are nearsighted. I am very nearsighted. So I must be a genius. Which one of the following exhibits both of the logical flaws exhibited in the argument above? (A) I must be stupid because all intelligent people are nearsighted and I have perfect eyesight. (B) All chickens have beaks. This bird has a beak. So this bird must be a chicken. (C) All pigs have four legs, but this spider has eight legs. So this spider must be twice as big as any pig. (D) John is extremely happy, so he must be extremely tall because all tall people are happy. (E) All geniuses are very nearsighted. I must be very nearsighted since I am a genius.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on English Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free