Question

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

E) question the ethical basis of an economic situation.

Step-by-step solution

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.

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.

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).

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.

Key concepts

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.