PT17.S3.Q22 - on saturday melvin suggested

Henry An

Hi all!

I had a question on answer choice E with this one. To me, the reasoning of flaw in answer choice E was the same as that of answer choice D of the same PT same section question 20.

Looking at the explanation of question 20 (Morton: In order to succeed (...)) in other forums on answer choice D, the explanations state that Morton actually DOES consider the counterexamples stated by the skeptics (which is why D is incorrect); the problem was that he just did it through a flawed way. The structure of this passage was:

1. Skeptics have objected (...) by providing counterexamples (context)
2. However, this success is only apparent (Main conclusion)
3. This is BECAUSE (...) (Premise)

So, in actuality, this argument DOES consider the skeptics counterexamples.

Now coming back to question 22, in my line of thinking, the author of the passage does the exact same thing as that of question 20.

1. Jerome refused Melvin's suggestion claiming that he could not afford the money (Context)
2. However, cost cannot be the real reason (Main conclusion)
3. This is BECAUSE he makes the same excuse all the time (Premise)

So, in line with the thinking of question 20, I thought that the author DOES in fact consider that it can be the real reason; its just that he supports it though a flawed way. Yet answer choice E (Does not examine the possibility (...)) goes against the line of reasoning of answer choice D in question 20....

Thanks in advance!

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-3-question-22/
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-17-section-3-question-20/