#15 - According to the proposed Factory Safety Act, a

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)

Since this argument uses conditional reasoning, so it may be worth your time to quickly diagram it:

• Premise (1): Auto Factory Class B Factory
  
  Premise (2): Class B Factory Punctual Inspections
  
  Conclusion: Auto Factory Punctual Inspections

The author concludes that because the operation of every automobile factory requires that this factory be registered as Class B, and Class B requires punctual inspections, an auto factory cannot postpone its safety inspections (i.e. needs punctual inspections). This argument is solid, as the conclusion is an additive inference deduced by combining two provisions of the Factory Safety Act. Answer choice (A) is therefore correct.

The two provisions mandate that the factory adhere to punctual inspections, which entails that a certain state of affairs (postponing such inspections) is unacceptable.

Answer choice (B) The author does not provide two possible interpretations of a legal regulation. Rather, she describes two provisions of a regulation. Their plausibility is neither questioned nor addressed. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C) The stimulus provides no evidence of what the existing legislation is or how compatible it is with the Factory Safety Act. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (D) The two provisions of the Safety Act are not in conflict; they function together to support the conclusion. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E) The author does not generalize from the applicability of the provision to automobile factories. No analogous situations are discussed. This answer choice is incorrect.

[adlindsey]

I just want to make sure I'm correct; the two provisions are registering and punctual inspections?

[Adam Tyson]

That's how I interpret it, adlindsey. Good job!

[jgray]

I diagrammed the argument correctly, but ruled out A due to the language at the end of the answer choice.

How did you deal with the "...unacceptability of a certain state of affairs" ending of A? What does that really mean? Is this a common technique the LSAT uses?
Thanks

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi jgray,

Great question! Here, the "unacceptability" of a state of affairs is that postponing safety inspections is not permissible. The state of affairs is postponing, and it is unacceptable because it violates the Act. This isn't necessarily language you'll see elsewhere on the LSAT, but generally when you have Method of Reasoning questions you can expect to see somewhat convoluted language like this. You always want to try to break it down and apply it directly to the stimulus, as I did above. I hope that helps!