LSAT Practice Test

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

1. Runaway train

2. Post hoc fallacy

3. Deductive reasoning

4. 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.