Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 77 - Section 4 - Question 13
January 31, 2016Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 145 - Section 4 - Question 13
January 31, 2016
Summary
Most skilled banjo players are also skilled guitar players. However, most skilled guitar players are not skilled banjo players.
Notable Valid Inferences
There are more skilled guitar players than skilled banjo players.
A
There are more people who are skilled at playing both the guitar and the banjo than there are people who are skilled at playing only one of the two instruments.
Must be false. There must be more people who are skilled guitar players but not skilled banjo players.
B
A person trying to learn how to play the guitar is more likely to succeed in doing so than is a person trying to learn how to play the banjo.
Could be false. The stimulus does not give us any information about which group is more likely to succeed. It is possible that more people are likely to succeed at playing the banjo, but the banjo just isn’t as popular.
C
Playing the guitar takes more skill than playing the banjo does.
Could be false. The stimulus does not give us any information about what instrument requires more skill. It is possible that playing the banjo requires more skill.
D
There are more people who are skilled at playing the guitar than there are people who are skilled at playing the banjo.
Must be true. This is the only way it could both be true that most skilled banjo players are skilled guitar players and that not most skilled guitar players are banjo players.
E
There are more people who are skilled at playing the banjo than there are people who are skilled at playing the guitar.
Must be false. There must be more people who are skilled guitar players but not skilled banjo players.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 77 - Section 4 - Question 12
January 31, 2016Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 145 - Section 4 - Question 12
January 31, 2016
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that the critics’ claim is false. The author supports this with the fact that the critics’ claim is based on data that is flawed.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author mistakenly assumes that a conclusion based on flawed data cannot be true. This overlooks the distinction between lack of support and a false conclusion. Although the critics’ claim might not be supported well due to flawed evidence, the claim could still be true.
A
infers that a claim is false merely on the grounds that no satisfactory evidence for it has been offered
The author infers that the critics’ claim is false merely on the grounds that the data offered for it is unsatisfactory (because it was flawed). This reasoning is flawed because the critics’ claim can still be true despite being based on bad data.
B
fails to consider that a pejorative claim that is true can be more harmful to a person’s reputation than a false claim
The author’s conclusion didn’t say that the critics’ claim is more harmful to the moviemakers’ reputations than some other kind of claim. So the possibility (B) describes doesn’t affect the argument.
C
relies on a sample that is likely to be unrepresentative
The author’s premise asserts that the data underlying the critics’ study was flawed. Pointing out the evidence underlying someone else’s argument is flawed doesn’t constitute using a sample.
D
attacks the persons making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument
The author doesn’t attack the critics. She attacks the critics’ data underlying their conclusion.
E
fails to consider that, even if an argument’s conclusion is false, some of the evidence used to justify that conclusion may nonetheless be true
The problem with the author’s argument is that she hasn’t shown the critics’ conclusion is false. So an answer that points out what might be true if the critics’ conclusion is false doesn’t undermine the argument. We want to point out why the critics’ conclusion might be true.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 77 - Section 4 - Question 11
January 31, 2016Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 145 - Section 4 - Question 11
January 31, 2016
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that university graduates are more likely to be in favor of retaining or increasing social services than the overall population. As evidence, she cites polls showing that graduating university students view social services more favorably than incoming students.
Notable Assumptions
The author believes hat since graduating university students view social services favorably, people with university education view social services favorably. She therefore assumes people don’t change their views on social services sometime after graduating. The author also assumes that incoming university students are representative of the general population, without considering people who never attend university.
A
The polls of graduating university students were designed to avoid overrepresenting any single academic discipline.
This strengthens the author’s argument. The polls weren’t skewed any one way.
B
The political views of people with a university education are to a large degree influenced by their professors, and university professors are usually against reducing government social services.
Like (A), this strengthens the author’s argument. If people with a university education are strongly influenced by their pro-social service professors, then they likely are more in favor of social services than the general population.
C
Polls of retired persons who have not graduated from a university show a higher percentage of persons in favor of reducing government social services than do polls of retired persons who have graduated from a university.
This supports the author’s argument. Later in life, people with no university education are more likely in favor of cutting social services than people with a university education.
D
Polls of those who graduated from a university more than five years before being polled show a higher percentage of people in favor of reducing government social services than do polls of the overall population.
While graduating students are disproportionately in favor of social services, these views change within five years of graduation. Thus, people with a university education actually aren’t more likely than average to be in favor of social services.
E
In the polls cited, graduating university students were more likely to express strong opinions about the question of reducing government social services than were students entering a university.
We don’t care who has strong opinions on the issue. We simply care how favorably they view retaining or increasing social services.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 77 - Section 4 - Question 10
January 31, 2016Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 145 - Section 4 - Question 10
January 31, 2016Columnist: Some people argue that the government should not take over failing private-sector banks because the government does not know how to manage financial institutions. However, rather than managing a bank’s day-to-day operations, the government would just need to select the bank’s senior management. Most politicians have never been military professionals, yet they appoint the top military officials entrusted with defending the country—at least as great a responsibility as managing a bank.
Summary
Some people argue the government should not take over failing private-sector banks because the government does not know how to manage financial institutions. However, the government would just need to select the bank’s senior management, not manage day-to-day operations. Most politicians have never been military professionals, yet they appoint the top military officials. This is at least as great a responsibility as managing a bank.
Notable Valid Inferences
Managing the military requires more knowledge than managing a private-sector bank does.
Government-owned banks can be well managed.
Politicians do an acceptable job when appointing top military officials to defend the country.
A
Commanding a branch of the military requires greater knowledge than running a bank does.
Could be true. The Columnist tells us that appointing top military officials is as least as great a responsibility as managing a bank. It is possible that commanding a military branch requires greater knowledge if it requires as much or more responsibility.
B
Politicians do an adequate job of appointing the top military officials entrusted with defending the country.
Could be true. The Columnist tells us that appointing top military officials is as least as great a responsibility as managing a bank in order to support their main conclusion. It is consistent for the Columnist to believe that politicians do an adequate job.
C
Politicians are not capable of managing a bank’s day-to-day operations.
Could be true. It is possible that the Columnist believes politicians are not capable of managing day-to-day operations, but the Columnist claims that politicians would not have to do this anyway. Instead, the politicians would select senior management.
D
Banks that are owned by the government cannot be well managed.
Must be false. This answer choice directly contradicts the Columnist’s argument in the stimulus. The Columnists is arguing against the people who claim the government should not take over failing private-sector banks.
E
The government should not take over private-sector banks that are financially sound.
Could be true. The argument in the stimulus is restricted to government takeover of failing private-sector banks. It is possible the Columnist believes the government should not take over private banks that are financially stable.
Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 77 - Section 4 - Question 09
January 31, 2016Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 145 - Section 4 - Question 09
January 31, 2016
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Joshi’s vote is being influenced by campaign contributions. This is based on the fact that Joshi’s re-election campaign has received more money from property developers than any other city councilor’s campaign. In addition, Joshi’s voting record favors property developers’ interest more than does the voting record of any other city councilor.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that Joshi’s favorable voting record for the property developers is a result of campaign contributions from the developers. But we don’t know which came first. It’s possible the developers contribute to Joshi because of Joshi’s votes. This opens the possibility that Joshi’s votes aren’t influenced by the contributions; he might be voting favorably to the developers for other reasons.
A
takes for granted that because certain events occurred sequentially, the earlier events caused the later events
The author doesn’t argue that Joshi is being influenced by campaign contributions because his votes occurred after the contributions. (In fact, we don’t know whether the votes occurred after the contributions.)
B
confuses one thing’s being necessary for another to occur with its being sufficient to make it occur
The argument isn’t based on conditional reasoning, so there is no confusion of sufficient and necessary conditions.
C
makes a moral judgment when only a factual judgment can be justified
The conclusion is not a moral judgment. A claim that someone is influenced by campaign contributions is simply a claim about cause and effect. It doesn’t involve a moral judgment.
D
presumes that one thing is the cause of another when it could easily be an effect of it
The author assumes that the contributions are a cause of Joshi’s votes that are favorable to property developers, but these contributions could be a result of Joshi’s votes. Maybe Joshi voted favorably first, and the contributions followed.
E
has a conclusion that is simply a restatement of one of the argument’s stated premises
(E) describes circular reasoning. The author’s conclusion — that contributions influence Joshi’s vote — isn’t restated in the premises. None of the premises assert that Joshi’s vote is affected by contributions.