LSAT 148 – Section 4 – Question 16

LSAT 148 - Section 4 - Question 16

December 2016

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:46

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
PT148 S4 Q16
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
A
7%
156
B
88%
164
C
2%
156
D
1%
155
E
1%
154
136
144
153
 +Medium 147.694 +SubsectionMedium

Last year, a software company held a contest to generate ideas for their new logo. According to the rules, everyone who entered the contest would receive several prizes, including a T-shirt with the company’s new logo. Juan has a T-shirt with the company’s new logo, so he must have entered the contest.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Juan must have entered the logo-generation contest. The author supports this conclusion with the following:

One of the rules stated that everyone who entered the contest would receive a T-shirt with the company’s logo.

Juan has a T-shirt with the company’s logo.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author confuses a sufficient condition with a necessary condition. Entrance into the contest is sufficient to get the T-shirt. But that doesn’t mean it’s necessary. Maybe some people could have gotten the T-shirt without entering the contest.

A
infers a causal relationship when the evidence only supports a correlation
The argument doesn’t conclude or assume a causal relationship. The argument’s based on application of a conditional rule.
B
takes a condition that is sufficient for a particular outcome as one that is necessary for that outcome
The contest rules tell us that entrance into the contest is sufficient for the outcome of getting a T-shirt with the logo. But that doesn’t imply entrance into the contest is necessary for the T-shirt. So the fact Juan has the T-shirt doesn’t prove that he entered the contest.
C
infers that every member of a group has a feature in common on the grounds that the group as a whole has that feature
The argument doesn’t commit a whole-to-part fallacy. The evidence concerns a rule of the contest and Juan. The conclusion is based on an attempt to apply that rule to Juan. The author doesn’t conclude or assume anything about every member of a group.
D
has a premise that presupposes the truth of the conclusion
(D) describes circular reasoning. The author’s conclusion — that Juan entered the contest — is not restated in the premises.
E
constructs a generalization on the basis of a single instance
The argument doesn’t generalize based on a single instance. The argument tries to apply a conditional rule to Juan. The argument doesn’t conclude or assume anything about a broader group.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 148 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply