Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: To stop global warming, we must use fewer fossil fuels; since incentives would lead to fewer fossil fuels, we must provide those incentives to stop warming.

Conclusion: Stopping global warming requires providing economic incentives for alternative energy.

Reasoning: Reducing fossil fuel use is necessary for stopping warming, and incentives would cause that reduction.

Analysis: This argument fails because it mistakes a 'way' for the 'only way.' Just because economic incentives would help reduce fossil fuel use doesn't mean they are the exclusive path to that goal. In formal logic terms, the author is treating a sufficient condition (incentives) as a necessary one. We are looking for a match that takes a helpful tool and incorrectly labels it a mandatory requirement.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

26.

The flawed pattern of reasoning exhibited by the argument above most closely parallels that exhibited by which one of the following?

Correct Answer
D
It matches the pattern: Improving education requires keeping good teachers (A → B). Increasing salaries would keep good teachers (C → B). The conclusion says improving education requires increasing salaries (A → C). That wrongly treats one way to secure the necessary condition as if it were itself necessary.
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