PrepTest 101

[lcid:3501] Prep Test 101 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Several excellent candidates have Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Errors in Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

Proposed candidates - Each has different talents/experience
Jones - Has a unique set of qualifications
Therefore - Jones is best qualified

Answer Anticipation

This argument has two features that we should take a look at to identify potential flaws.
First, the argument is based on a comparison between Jones and the other candidates. The relevant difference here is that Jones’ qualifications are unique to her - no other proposed candidate has them. However, that’s also true of all the other candidates - “each [has] different talents and experience.” There’s no reason to believe that Jones’ unique qualifications are any better than the other candidates’ unique qualifications, so the argument is flawed because the comparison it relies on doesn’t lead to the conclusion.
Second, the conclusion is itself a comparison - in fact, a superlative one. It states Jones is the “best qualified” person to take over UW. If we assume for a second that her unique qualifications are better/more relevant than those of the other candidates, that still proves only that Jones is the best of the proposed candidates to run UW. However, this conclusion is broader than that, comparing her to all potential candidates. The correct answer could highlight this flaw, as well.

Answer choices

  1. A
    uses flattery to win Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Only Jones and the other candidates are flattered, not those who are listening to the argument, so this answer is incorrect. (If this answer has ever been correct, it’s only a handful of times, but we can’t think of an example where it is.)

  2. B
    refutes a distorted version Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    This answer describes a Straw Man flaw. However, there’s no opposing point raised (just suggested - no one actually argues that Jones isn’t the best qualified for the position), so this flaw can’t be present.

  3. C
    seeks to distinguish one Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem
    This answer highlights the first flaw we identified - that the comparison raised doesn’t actually distinguish the relevant parties. The premises establish that each candidate brings a unique set of qualifications, but it uses the fact that Jones has such qualifications to establish she’s best suited for the position. In order to conclude a difference (one person is better than the rest), a relevant difference needs to be established!

  4. D
    supports a universal claim Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    You could argue that the conclusion is a general claim since it says Jones is the “best qualified,” which compares her to everyone else. However, Jones is compared to “several” excellent candidates, not a single one.

  5. E
    describes an individual in Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Jones herself has a unique set of qualifications. While that’s true of the others, as well, it’s true of each of them individually - not only when considered as a group. This answer would be correct if the argument jumped from what was true of the whole to what was true of a member of that group, which isn’t what this argument does.

What this tests

Discussion

  • Answer B 1 reply

    Started by eversm

View all discussions Start a discussion