LR Question 12 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Despite the fact that antilock breaks are designed to make driving…
QUESTION TYPE: Paradox – Exception
FACTS: People who drive cars with anti-lock brakes have more accidents even though anti-lock brakes are designed to make driving safer.
ANALYSIS: We’re trying to explain the number of accidents. The stimulus doesn’t mention how serious the accidents are.
The wrong answer choice (E) just shows anti-lock breaks shouldn’t reduce the rate of highway accidents. It does not show why anti-lock brakes actually cause more accidents.
___________
- This helps. Maybe anti-lock brakes make you feel safe and you drive recklessly.
- That isn’t much good then, is it? Malfunctions explain why anti-lock brakes make us less safe.
- This could mean that people don’t pay for maintenance and so their brakes stop working.
- If people don’t know how to use anti-lock brakes then it’s easy to see why they have accidents.
- CORRECT. This is very tempting. But this doesn’t say that anti-lock brakes cause more accidents on highways. It just makes an obvious statement that highway accidents are more serious when they do happen.
More Resources for Paradox Questions
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Paradox questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers paradox questions.
Thank you for providing such a comprehensive resource. This site has been my loyal companion as I approach test day.
Regarding this specific question, it is difficult for me to understand why B is incorrect.
As I understand it, correct answers in paradox questions are those which allow both ‘sides’ of the paradox to be true while the phenomenon is explained. In the case of an EXCEPT question then, the correct answer will be that which does not allow both paradoxical facts to be true.
To this end, I thought B was the correct choice because the brakes malfunctioning more often would conflict with the point of their design making driving safer, because their malfunctioning reveals that their design does NOT do so.
Thanks again for all the help
I’m glad to hear you’re enjoying the site! That’s a great question.
The key issue in your reasoning is the distinction between design and outcome. The stimulus says antilock brakes are designed to make driving safer. That’s a statement about intent or purpose, not about how they actually perform in real life.
In Paradox questions, you’re right the correct answers should explain how both sides can be true at once. For an except question, we’re looking for the one that doesn’t help resolve the issue.
So, here we’re trying to explain how antilock brakes are designed to make driving safer yet cause more accidents.
If B is true, it WOULD explain the paradox. Even though they were designed to make driving safer, frequent malfunctions would make them less safe in practice, leading to more accidents. In simpler words: their design/purpose is failing.
The fact that their design is failing doesn’t contradict the claim that they are designed to be safer. Their design can still be true, just that they’re not achieving the desired outcome.
Note also that a correct answer for an EXCEPT doesn’t have to “not allow both facts to be true”. It just has to NOT resolve the paradox. Each of the other answers explains why they’re failing to achieve their desired outcome despite their design. E just doesn’t really give us any information about the paradox at all, which is why it doesn’t resolve the paradox.
Hope that helps! Let me know if you have further questions.