LSAT 16 – Section 3 – Question 02

LSAT 16 - Section 3 - Question 02

September 1995

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 0:38

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question QuickView	Type	Tags	Answer Choices	Curve	Question Difficulty	Psg/Game/S Difficulty	Explanation
PT16 S3 Q02	+LR	Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw	A 1% 154 B 99% 167 C 0% 149 D 0% 146 E 0%	120 125 134	+Easiest	147.952 +SubsectionMedium

Here we have a flaw question, which we know from the question stem: “The argument’s reasoning is flawed because the argument…” Right away we know our correct answer has to do two things: be descriptively accurate, and describe the flaw of the stimulus. We also know what the wrong answers will do - describe reasoning flaws we’ve seen before, but don’t like up with our stimulus. Once we have a clear understanding of the questrion’s objective, we can proceed into structural analysis of the stimulus.

We can uncover the classic reasoning flaw in this question by using structural analysis. The argument begins by telling us that to date, no one has successfully communicated with intelligent life outside of planet Earth. The author introduces their main point in the final sentence, saying that because no one has identified evidence of intelligent life outside of planet Earth, it must not exist. We know that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Meaning that just because we do not find evidence something exists that thing itself does not exist. Maybe we have poor equipment or lack the skills necessary to find the dozens of alien species that exist on other planets.

Answer Choice (A) This answer choice is descriptively accurate, but not the issue of our stimulus. Whether or not intelligent non-living things exist does not impact our discussion on the existence of intelligent living things.

Correct Answer Choice (B) This is exactly what we are looking for! This descriptively accurate telling of the flaw is the only answer choice that points out the lack of evidence used as the basis for our speaker’s overall conclusion.

Answer Choice (C) This answer choice is not descriptively accurate. The argument does not say “because they disagree, they are wrong!” as would have to be the case for this answer choice to be correct. But we do not see any sort of disagreement being referenced as the support of the ultimate conclusion.

Answer Choice (D) This answer choice is not descriptively accurate. If our argument were relying “on the vagueness of the term ‘life’” we would see the underlying meaning or definition arise as an issue in the discussion in some way.

Answer Choice (E) This answer choice is not descriptively accurate. By saying that our argument relies on a weak analogy, this answer choice claims a comparison between two things that cannot be seen here. Additionally, our answer choice certainly does have some evidence it relies on in contrast with what this answer choice states. Just because the evidence or rationale is bad does not mean that they do not have it.

LSAT 16 – Section 3 – Question 02

LSAT 16 - Section 3 - Question 02

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 16 Explanations

Section 1 - Logic Games

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel