LSAT 124 – Section 3 – Question 13

LSAT 124 - Section 3 - Question 13

December 2007

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

Target time: 0:59

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
PT124 S3 Q13	+LR	Except +Exc Parallel flawed method of reasoning +PF Part v. Whole +PvW	A 19% 159 B 66% 166 C 6% 159 D 2% 158 E 6% 160	147 157 166	+Harder	145.896 +SubsectionMedium

The question stem reads: Each of the following arguments exhibits flawed reasoning similar to that in the argument above EXCEPT… This is a Parallel Flaw question.

The author states that each of the smallest particles in the universe has an “elegantly simple structure.” Since the universe is composed of these particles, the author concludes that the universe also has an “elegantly simple structure.” The argument makes a fallacy of composition (part to whole). Just because a part or all of the parts have a particular property, the property does not necessarily carry over to the whole. By a similar line of reasoning, we could conclude that because the parts of a car cannot move on their own, and a car is composed of those parts, the car itself must not be able to move.

Because this is an except question, the wrong answer choices will contain a fallacy of composition. The right answer choice could exhibit some other fallacy or be a valid argument.

Answer Choice (A) is incorrect. (A) matches the stimulus by saying that because the parts of a car have the property of being perfectly engineered, then the car (the parts put together) must also have the property of being perfectly engineered. The car's parts may be well-engineered, but the car could be designed and assembled in a terrible fashion. Eliminate (A).

Correct Answer Choice (B) does make an argument from part to whole. However, (B) is not a fallacious argument. If every part of the desk is made of metal, then it must be true the desk is made of metal. While the properties of the parts do not necessarily carry over to the whole, sometimes they do. You must use your judgment to determine whether a “part to whole” argument works or is fallacious. Because (B) makes a good argument, (B) is our right answer.

Answer Choice (C) is incorrect. (C) matches the stimulus by saying because bricks have the property of being rectangular, the wall of bricks (the bricks put together) must have the property of being rectangular. What if the wall is built in a circle? Eliminate (C).

Answer Choice (D) is incorrect. (D) matches the stimulus by saying that because each piece of wood has the property of being sturdy, then the desk (the wood put together) must also have the property of being sturdy. Perhaps the stool was poorly put together. Eliminate (D).

Answer Choice (E) is incorrect. (E) matches our stimulus by saying that because each sentence of the novel has the property of being well constructed, the novel (all of the sentences put together) must also have the property of being well constructed. Eliminate (E).

LSAT 124 – Section 3 – Question 13

LSAT 124 - Section 3 - Question 13

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 124 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel