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

In a study of the effect of radiation from nuclear weapons plants on people living in areas near them, researchers compared death rates in the areas near the plants with death rates in areas that had no such plants. Finding no difference in these rates, the researchers concluded that radiation from the nuclear weapons plants poses no health hazards to people living near them. Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the researchers' argument? (A) Nuclear power plants were not included in the study. (B) The areas studied had similar death rates before and after the nuclear weapons plants were built. (C) Exposure to nuclear radiation can cause many serious diseases that do not necessarily result in death. (D) Only a small number of areas have nuclear weapons plants. (E) The researchers did not study the possible health hazards of radiation on people who were employed at the nuclear weapons plants if those employees did not live in the study areas.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Option C weakens the argument most.

Step by step solution

01

Identify the Conclusion

The conclusion of the researcher's argument is that radiation from nuclear weapons plants poses no health hazards to people living near them. This conclusion is based on the observation that there was no difference in death rates between areas near the plants and areas without them.
02

Assess Relevance of Options

Each option suggests a potential flaw or oversight in the study. The goal is to find the one that most seriously undermines the given conclusion that there are no health hazards due to radiation from the plants.
03

Evaluate Option C

Option C states that exposure to nuclear radiation can cause many serious diseases that do not necessarily result in death. This directly challenges the validity of equating the lack of difference in death rates with the absence of health hazards, highlighting that death isn't the only consequence of radiation exposure.
04

Consider Other Options

Evaluate the other options: - Option A is irrelevant because the study is about nuclear weapons plants, not power plants. - Option B mentions similar death rates but doesn't explain other potential health effects. - Option D might suggest the study sample was limited but doesn't directly address health hazards. - Option E focuses on employees not living in the study area, which doesn't directly affect residents.
05

Determine the Correct Answer

Option C most significantly weakens the argument because it indicates that health hazards could exist in forms other than death, such as non-fatal diseases caused by radiation, which the study failed to account for.

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.

Argument Evaluation
In logical reasoning, evaluating an argument consists of carefully examining the various components that make it up. When you encounter an argument in an LSAT logical reasoning section, it usually consists of a premise and a conclusion. Sometimes, students find it challenging to separate these components. A premise is the evidence or the fact used to support the main claim, whereas the conclusion is what the author seeks to prove. To effectively evaluate an argument, you must:
  • Identify the conclusion – What is the main point being made?
  • Find the premises – What are the reasons provided to support the conclusion?
  • Consider assumptions – What is taken for granted in the argument?
By evaluating these components, you'll be better prepared to analyze the soundness of an argument. This is crucial for LSAT's logical reasoning questions, as you need to identify whether the premises genuinely lead to the conclusion or if there's a gap in the logic.
Conclusion Analysis
Conclusion analysis involves a close examination of the argument's endpoint or main claim, which in this scenario, is that radiation poses no health hazards to nearby residents. It's essential to scrutinize how closely linked the conclusion is to its supporting evidence. A strong conclusion analysis checks if the conclusion logically follows from its premises. You must:
  • Determine if any assumptions, regardless of being explicit or implicit, are necessary for the conclusion to hold true.
  • Look for alternative explanations that could undermine the link between premises and conclusion.
In our given example, the conclusion drawn from similar death rates doesn't consider that health hazards could manifest in non-death-related illnesses. This oversight is precisely what option C highlights, showcasing a logic gap in the initial analysis.
Critical Reasoning
Critical reasoning is the practice of thoughtfully and rigorously examining the argument's logic. It involves questioning the reliability and completeness of the evidence supporting a claim. Particularly, for LSAT questions, this means understanding how arguments are constructed and where their weaknesses might lie. To engage in critical reasoning:
  • Identify ambiguities and vagueness in the argument.
  • Reflect on other pieces of evidence that, if true, could alter the argument's conclusion.
  • Think about real-world implications and exceptions that may challenge the argument.
When critically reasoning through the example argument, you'd note that equating death rates with health hazards could overlook many nuances. Therefore, examining non-fatal effects, such as diseases that radiation exposure causes, becomes crucial for a well-rounded evaluation.
Weaken Argument Questions
Weaken argument questions on the LSAT test your ability to identify factors that could undermine an argument. Your task is to find a statement or piece of evidence that introduces doubt about the conclusion's validity. To answer these questions successfully:
  • Consider the premises and find any assumption that, if negated, impacts the conclusion.
  • Look for evidence that contradicts the premise-conclusion link.
  • Identify external information that reveals oversight or error in the reasoning.
In the presented exercise, option C serves this purpose. By introducing the idea that radiation could cause serious but non-fatal diseases, it highlights a significant gap in the argument's basis, which solely focused on death rates as an indicator of health hazards. Thus, it effectively weakens the conclusion by uncovering the study's limited scope.

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

Editorial: It is clear that if this country's universities were living up to both their moral and their intellectual responsibilities, the best-selling publications in most university bookstores would not be frivolous ones like TV Today and Gossip Review. However, in most university bookstores the only publication that sells better than Gossip Review is TV Today. If the statements in the editorial are true, which one of the following must also be true on the basis of them? (A) People who purchase publications that are devoted primarily to gossip or to television programming are intellectually irresponsible. (B) It is irresponsible for university bookstores to carry publications such as Gossip Review and TV Today. (C) Most people who purchase publications at university bookstores purchase either TV Today or Gossip Review. (D) Many people who attend this country's universities fail to live up to both their moral and their intellectual responsibilities. (E) At least some of this country's universities are not meeting their moral responsibilities or their intellectual responsibilities or both.

Nutritionists have recommended that people eat more fiber. Advertisements for a new fiber-supplement pill state only that it contains " 44 percent fiber." The advertising claim is misleading in its selection of information on which to focus if which one of the following is true? (A) There are other products on the market that are advertised as providing fiber as a dietary supplement. (B) Nutritionists base their recommendation on medical findings that dietary fiber protects against some kinds of cancer. (C) It is possible to become addicted to some kinds of advertised pills, such as sleeping pills and painkillers. (D) The label of the advertised product recommends taking 3 pills every day. (E) The recommended daily intake of fiber is 20 to 30 grams, and the pill contains one-third gram.

Which one of the following statements concerning the reason for the end of allotment, if true, would provide the most support for the author's view of politicians? (A) Politicians realized that allotment was damaging the Native American way of life. (B) Politicians decided that allotment would be more congruent with the Native American custom of communal land use. (C) Politicians believed that allotment's continuation would not enhance their opportunities to exercise patronage. (D) Politicians felt that the staff and budgets of the BIA had grown too large. (E) Politicians were concerned that too much Native American land was falling into the hands of non-Native Americans.

It was once believed that cells grown in laboratory tissue cultures were essentially immortal. That is, as long as all of their needs were met, they would continue dividing forever. However, it has been shown that normal cells have a finite reproductive limit. A human liver cell, for example, divides 60 times and then stops. If such a cell divides 30 times and then is put into a deep freeze for months or even years, it "remembers" where it stopped dividing. After thawing, it divides another 30 times - but no more. If the information above is accurate, a liver cell in which more than 60 divisions took place in a tissue culture CANNOT be which one of the following? (A) an abnormal human liver cell (B) a normal human liver cell that had been frozen after its first division and afterward thawed (C) a normal cell that came from the liver of an individual of a nonhuman species and had never been frozen (D) a normal liver cell that came from an individual of a nonhuman species and had been frozen after its first division and afterward thawed (E) an abnormal cell from the liver of an individual of a nonhuman species

The great medieval universities had no administrators, yet they endured for centuries. Our university has a huge administrative staff, and we are in serious financial difficulties. Therefore, we should abolish the positions and salaries of the administrators to ensure the longevity of the university. Which one of the following arguments contains flawed reasoning that most closely parallels the flawed reasoning in the argument above? (A) No airplane had jet engines before 1940, yet airplanes had been flying since 1903. Therefore, jet engines are not necessary for the operation of airplanes. (B) The novelist's stories began to be accepted for publication soon after she started using a computer to write them. You have been having trouble getting your stories accepted for publication, and you do not use a computer. To make sure your stories are accepted for publication, then, you should write them with the aid of a computer. (C) After doctors began using antibiotics, the number of infections among patients dropped drastically. Now, however, resistant strains of bacteria cannot be controlled by standard antibiotics. Therefore, new methods of control are needed. (D) A bicycle should not be ridden without a helmet. Since a good helmet can save the rider's life, a helmet should be considered the most important piece of bicycling equipment. (E) The great cities of the ancient world were mostly built along waterways. Archaeologists searching for the remains of such cities should therefore try to determine where major rivers used to run.

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