LSAT (Law School Admission Test)Logical ReasoningMedium
A recent article argues that widespread adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) will significantly reduce urban air pollution. The article cites data showing that EVs produce zero tailpipe emissions. However, critics point out that the electricity used to charge EVs often comes from power plants that burn fossil fuels, thus producing emissions elsewhere. The critics' argument primarily serves to:
- ASuggest that the article's data on tailpipe emissions is inaccurate.
- BArgue that electric vehicles are not a viable solution for reducing pollution.
- CIntroduce an alternative solution to reducing urban air pollution.
- DHighlight a potential flaw in the article's reasoning regarding the environmental impact of EVs.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: D. Highlight a potential flaw in the article's reasoning regarding the environmental impact of EVs.
The article focuses only on tailpipe emissions. The critics bring up the emissions from electricity generation, pointing out that total emissions (which impact overall pollution) might not be reduced as much as implied. This challenges the article's conclusion by revealing a gap in its environmental assessment, thus highlighting a flaw in its reasoning.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. The critics do not dispute that EVs have zero tailpipe emissions; they introduce an additional factor (power plant emissions) to complicate the conclusion. Therefore, it's not about accuracy of data but completeness of scope.
- B. The critics don't necessarily argue that EVs are not viable, but rather cast doubt on the *extent* of their pollution reduction benefits, especially concerning the 'significant reduction' claim, by considering the full energy cycle.
- C. The critics are not suggesting an alternative solution but rather critiquing the effectiveness of the proposed solution.
Role of a Statement
Identifying the 'role' of a statement in an argument involves determining how it functions—whether it's a premise, conclusion, counter-premise, evidence, or an assumption—to support or challenge the main point.
- Requires understanding the argument's structure.
- Distinguishes between evidence and claims derived from evidence.
- Examines how a statement impacts the argument's validity.
Memory trick: Each word plays a part, building the argument's art.