Logical reasoning PrepTest 138 · Section 3 · Question 16

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Believe important problems can be addressed only by large numbers of people AND government action doesn't make that happen → Unenthusiastic about voting
Therefore - Decreasing voter turnout is because people believe politicians can't solve problems

Answer Anticipation:
There are three ways to approach this question!

The first relies on noting that the first statement is conditional—it has that "if" a little ways into it. From there, it establishes that certain beliefs lead to people being unenthusiastic about voting. Then, it concludes that being unenthusiastic about voting (i.e., there being lower voter turnout) is "entirely due" to those beliefs. That's assuming that there are no other sufficient conditions to make people unenthusiastic about voting.

The other way to look at this is through a phenomenon/explanation lens. There's a connection between a phenomenon and one explanation noted, and then the argument concludes that when the phenomenon is present, the explanation must also apply. This ignores that there could be multiple causes/explanations for a given phenomenon.

The last way to look at this is to note that the conclusion is causal—one thing is "due to" another. And that causal relationship is based on a conditional statement, which establishes only a correlation. So there's a correlation/causation flaw here, and thus the correct answer is likely to bring up that flaw—including that it assumes there are no other potential causes of the drop in voter turnout.

All three methods essentially boil down to the same flaw—the argument ignores an alternative.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that the argument assumes there are no other factors that could explain a given effect/phenomenon—the decline in voter turnout. Since the stimulus only notes one potential explanation/correlation, it leaves open the possibility that there are others.

Key Takeaway:
Many flaws on the LSAT boil down to the argument failing to consider alternative causes or explanations. When you're stuck, start with the conclusion and try to come up with an alternative to it.

Incorrect. The stimulus is about what people believe, not what the reality is. Picking this answer sees you jumping between a stimulus about subjective beliefs to an answer about objective reality.

Incorrect. The argument is about why voter turnout is down, not how to improve it, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. These two ideas seem related to each other, so an argument wouldn't undermine itself by bringing them both up—they're not contradictory. Even if they are, people can and often do hold contradictory beliefs.

Incorrect. The stimulus never notes voter apathy as a cause for anything—it's noted in the stimulus as being an effect.