LSAT 153 – Section 2 – Question 07

LSAT 153 - Section 2 - Question 07

June 2019

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

Target time: 0:45

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
PT153 S2 Q07	+LR	Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw	A 1% 148 B 0% 152 C 2% 153 D 5% 151 E 93% 162	132 139 147	+Easier	146.684 +SubsectionMedium

Kevin: My barber shop sells an herbal supplement that, according to my barber, helps prevent baldness because it contains an enzyme that blocks the formation of a chemical compound that causes people to lose hair.

Sabine: That’s simply not true. The fact is, your barber makes money by convincing people to buy that product.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

Sabine argues that the barber’s claim is not true because the barber makes money by convincing people to buy the product.

Identify and Describe Flaw

This is the cookie-cutter “ad hominem” flaw, where the author attacks the source of the argument rather than the argument itself.

Here, Sabine dismisses the barber’s claim simply because the barber benefits from selling the product. Sabine never actually engages with the barber’s evidence, nor does she give any reason to believe that the product does not help prevent baldness.

discounts scientifically plausible evidence merely because the person offering it is not a scientist

Sabine doesn't address the fact that the barber is not a scientist. Instead, she discounts the barber’s claim merely because the barber benefits from selling the product.

takes for granted that a product will be harmful if it is sold on the basis of an unsubstantiated claim

Sabine never claims or assumes that the product will be harmful. She just says that it’s not true that the product helps prevent baldness.

rejects an explanation without proposing an alternative explanation

The barber explains that the product prevents baldness by blocking a certain chemical compound. Sabine rejects the claim that it prevents baldness, but she doesn’t challenge the barber’s explanation. She also doesn’t need to propose an alternative explanation.

draws a conclusion about someone’s motives for making a particular claim without providing evidence that any such claim was actually made

Sabine draws a conclusion about the barber’s claim based on an assumption about the barber’s motives. Her conclusion isn’t about the barber’s motives. Also, she doesn’t need to provide evidence that the barber’s claim was made; Kevin just said that it was made.

rejects a claim merely because the person making the claim stands to benefit by doing so

Sabine rejects the barber’s claim that the product helps prevent baldness merely because the barber stands to benefit from that claim. Sabine doesn't give any real evidence against the barber’s claim.

LSAT 153 – Section 2 – Question 07

LSAT 153 - Section 2 - Question 07

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 153 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel