LSAT 153 – Section 3 – Question 26

LSAT 153 - Section 3 - Question 26

June 2019

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:08

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 S3 Q26
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
A
1%
154
B
20%
159
C
3%
153
D
37%
160
E
39%
165
156
167
179
 +Hardest 146.755 +SubsectionMedium

Employee: Vernon’s behavior in last month’s incident was certainly unprofessional enough that our company was justified in firing him. But several higher-ranking employees whose behavior in the incident was just as unprofessional haven’t been fired and are treated as employees in good standing. So for the sake of consistency, the company must give Vernon his job back.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the company must give Vernon his job back. This is based on the fact that several higher-ranking employees engaged in behavior just as unprofessional as Vernon did, but haven’t been fired. In addition, the company should be consistent.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author overlooks the fact that another consistent course of action would be to keep Vernon fired, but to also fire the other employees who engaged in unprofesional behavior.

A
illicitly using a key term in different senses during the course of the argument
There is no term that is used in different senses. “Unprofessional” means unprofessional.
B
confusing behavior that is sufficient to justify an action with behavior that is required to justify that action
The author admits Vernon’s behavior justified his firing. But the author does not assume that unprofessional behavior is necessary to justify his firing. The argument doesn’t concern what is required for firing; it concerns what is required in order for consistency.
C
offering as its primary evidence a premise that is equivalent to the argument’s conclusion
(C) describes circular reasoning. The author’s conclusion is not restated in the evidence. The premises do not assert that Vernon should be given his job back.
D
treating behavior that can sometimes result in a certain consequence as behavior that always results in that consequence
We know that unprofessional behavior sometimes results in firing, as shown by the firing of Vernon. But the author does not assume that unprofessional behavior always results in firing. In fact, the author points to examples of people who were not fired, but unprofessional.
E
inferring that one specific response to a problem is necessary without considering another equally supported response
The author assumes that one specific response (give Vernon his job back) to a problem (inconsistency) is necessary without considering another equally supported response (firing the other employees).

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 153 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply