LSAT Practice Test

Disable ads (and more) with a membership for a one time $2.99 payment

Prepare for the LSAT with our comprehensive quiz featuring multiple choice questions, hints, and detailed explanations. This is your ultimate guide to mastering the LSAT and boosting your confidence on test day!

Each practice test/flash card set has 50 randomly selected questions from a bank of over 500. You'll get a new set of questions each time!

Practice this question and more.

Which argument presents a situation where supporting one course of action would support more of it without justification?

Runaway train
Post hoc fallacy
Deductive reasoning
Inductive reasoning

The correct answer is: Runaway train

The correct answer is A, Runaway train. In the scenario of a runaway train, supporting the course of action of rerouting the train without justification could lead to supporting more rerouting without proper reasoning. This can create a situation where a potentially dangerous or illogical course of action is perpetuated without critical evaluation or justification. Options B, C, and D do not inherently present a situation where supporting one course of action could lead to more of it without justification. The post hoc fallacy refers to mistakenly assuming that because one event follows another, the first event caused the second. Deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning are logical reasoning processes that do not necessarily involve a cascading effect of supporting more of a course of action without justification.