General Flaws Question

motunrayobbmartins

help would there be a circular reasoning flaw if a stimulus presents 2 premises, 1 that repeats the conclusion, and another that does not repeat the premise but has a separate flaw.

FaviPapi-1-1

Theoretically, yes: that could happen... As you may know, an argument can have multiple flaws. However, I think I need to see a question that describes such an argument. The more I think about it, the more I go against my answer above! Hahaha

motunrayobbmartins

@FaviPapi okay, so if a stimulus mentioned: Anna believes that cats are scary. Her belief is correct, because of how scary cats are. Also, she had a traumatic event as a child in which a cat bit her severely.
The idea of a circular argument is repeating the premise. However, what if like here, the author also presented another premise that actually works. Would that still be the flaw? Does this make sense

kkole444

Hello @motunrayobbmartins Yes I think that would constitute the flaw. the LSAT could ask that and it could be the correct (supporting the conclusion with a premise that restates the conclusion) answer, however, on the LSAT it is usually explicit when they employ that flaw. The LSAT has given 2+ premises on other question types but only decided to 'use' or implicate one for the correct answer choice. I have seen that in SA/NA and MBT/MBF and Strengthen questions.