Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: The government lowered the speed limit, and fewer people died on the road last year. Because of this, the author concludes that the speed limit change actually caused the safety improvement.

Conclusion: Lowering the speed limit is capable of decreasing the number of traffic deaths.

Reasoning: There was a correlation between the reduction of the speed limit and a decrease in highway fatalities over the following year.

Analysis: This is a classic 'correlation equals causation' trap. The argument assumes that no other factor—like better weather, safer car technology, or less overall driving—was responsible for the drop in deaths. To be valid, the argument needs to assume that the decrease wasn't just a coincidence or caused by something else entirely. Look for an answer that addresses the exclusion of alternative causes or confirms that the speed limit was the primary driver of the change.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

17.

The argument is most vulnerable to the criticism that it takes for granted that

Correct Answer
E
E is necessary. If the year before the change was abnormally high in fatalities, then the subsequent decrease could just be a reversion to typical levels, not an effect of the speed-limit reduction. Negating E (“the prior year was abnormally high”) makes the argument’s support collapse, so the argument takes E for granted.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep