Practice Quiz

LSAT

Category - Logical Reasoning

Start a Study Session Sign up for Question of the Day
Pundit: “Recent cuts to the food stamp program are regrettable but will not have a large effect. For the past two years, food stamp benefits have been cut by 5% each year. This year’s 5% cut is the same as in previous years, giving us no reason to believe that the effects will be any more severe. Food stamp beneficiaries have adjusted to the previous cuts and learned to shop more efficiently. They will successfully do the same this year.”

The pundit’s reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
  1. The pundit does not take into account that the proposed cut’s dollar amount is lower than that of previous years.
  2. The pundit relies without justification on the probability that the economy will improve.
  3. The pundit does not raise the issue of whether the food stamp program should exist at all.
  4. The pundit does not answer why the food stamp program is repeatedly targeted for cuts.
  5. The pundit fails to consider the cumulative effect of the cuts and recognize that the effects for a third year of cuts could be more severe than that of previous years.
Explanation
Answer: E - The pundit’s reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism because it fails to consider the cuts’ cumulative effect and recognize that the impact of a third year of cuts could be more severe than that of previous years.
Previous Next
Was this helpful? Upvote!
Login to contribute your own answer or details
Start a Study Session Sign up for Question of the Day

Top questions

Related questions

Most popular on PracticeQuiz