Logical reasoning PrepTest 107 · Section 3 · Question 7

Incorrect. Having a self-interested motive isn't itself a flaw—after all, plenty of people argue for positive things despite having an interest in the outcome!

Incorrect. There's nothing inherently wrong with including those concepts in the meaning of "well-being"—it'd only be an issue if it shifted the meaning throughout the argument.

Incorrect. The argument specifically compared people to their contemporaries, so some people falling out of that group is out of scope.

Incorrect. This answer aligns with the argument since the argument believes that volunteering is what's improving these retired individual's mental outlook.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Retired people who volunteer age better and are better off than others, so volunteering causes you to age better!

Answer Anticipation:
We rephrased the stimulus significantly in order to highlight the error in reasoning—doing this is a skill you should be working on as you practice the exam!

Here, it's noted that a group that has one characteristic—volunteering—also has another—they are better off. From this, it concludes that volunteering "benefit[s] your own well-being"—a causal conclusion, inferring that the volunteering is causing these people to see fewer and milder effects of aging. That's a jump from a correlation to a causation, so we've identified the flaw.

In Errors in Reasoning questions, the answer will often bring up the Correlation/Causation flaw, but it will also often get into the specific type of Correlation/Causation flaw. In general, there are three:
(1) The correlation is a coincidence (rare)
(2) There is a third phenomenon that causes the two in the correlation
(3) The relationship is actually the reverse of the one concluded

When the third makes sense, it's generally the correct answer. And here, it makes sense to say that retired people who are doing better are the ones who are going to volunteer—they have more health and resources to be able to do so! Let's find an answer bringing that up.

Answer Explanation:
This answer is the "reversed causality" answer, stating that the characteristics the argument infers are the effect of volunteering is actually what enables the person to volunteer in the first place. This answer describes the specific error in reasoning in the stimulus.

Key Takeaway:
Start to look at the indirect ways the LSAT introduces key concepts. Here, the correlation was introduced by describing a group with two characteristics. Whenever you see that happening, start to think about a Correlation/Causation flaw!