Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: A columnist claims climbing mountains isn't as dangerous as people think because way more people die in car accidents in France than on Mount Everest.

Conclusion: The media has significantly overstated the dangers associated with mountain climbing.

Reasoning: There were fewer than 200 deaths on Mount Everest over an 80-year span, whereas France alone saw over 7,000 traffic deaths in a single year.

Analysis: This is a classic 'base rate' fallacy where the speaker compares raw numbers without considering the size of the populations involved. To find the flaw, look for the gap between the total number of deaths and the actual risk per person; after all, millions of people drive in France every day, while very few people attempt to summit Everest. It’s a bit like saying it's safer to swim with sharks than to sit on a couch because more people die on couches—it ignores how many people are actually doing the activity.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

10.

The reasoning in the columnist's argument is flawed because it fails to consider

Correct Answer
D
D points directly to the missing denominators and mismatched exposure/time frames. Without knowing how many climbers there were over 80 years vs. how many people traveled on French roads in one year, the columnist’s comparison of raw totals cannot support the conclusion about relative danger.
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