Logical reasoning PrepTest 124 · Section 2 · Question 12

Incorrect. Campisi states that she finds Yang's inference unconvincing, not that there would be a better way to prove the conclusion.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Valid

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Y: The Bible talks about leavens in 1200BC, so yeast was known to be a leaven then.

C: But there are other leavens that could have been known then, so your argument is unconvincing.

Answer Anticipation:
Campisi uses a common rebuttal tactic seen on the LSAT—bringing up alternative possibilities. Yang assumes that any mention of a leavening agent refers to yeast. Campisi highlights that there are more leavening agents than just yeast, so a reference to such an agent might refer to one of them.

Let's find an answer reflecting that.

Answer Explanation:
Yang presumes that any reference to a leavening agent refers to yeast. Campisi questions that by highlighting that there are alternative leavening agents. This answer highlights Campisi's response (albeit without mentioning alternatives, which would have made it easier to spot), so it's correct.

Key Takeaway:
When a Methods of Reasoning question asks about a rebuttal, be sure to note what part of the initial argument the response disagrees with. Is it the premises, the assumption, the conclusion, or a combination? Knowing this is key to finding the correct answer!

Incorrect. In bringing up other leavening agents that could have been known in 1200BC, Campisi does rebut (and thus consider) Yang's reason. Additionally, Campisi finds the inference unconvincing, not wrong, so she doesn't deny the truth of Yang's conclusion.

Incorrect. Campisi doesn't point out a contrary conclusion, so this answer can't describe her method of reasoning.

Incorrect. Campisi doesn't question whether the Bible refers to leavening agents dating back to 1200BC, just what the implication of that is as far as yeast is concerned.