PrepTest 101

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

Question prompt

Anthropological studies indicate that Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

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

Bizarro / Weaken Questions

Stimulus Summary

Anthropologists: Different cultures have different moral codes
Therefore - As long as different cultures exist, no morals are shared

Answer Anticipation

This argument has a few elements we should dig into to find the flaw.
First, it’s based on anthropological studies. While we normally defer to experts on the LSAT unless we’re given a reason to doubt them, that changes in Bizarro questions. Since four answers will weaken this, we should anticipate an answer that brings up information leading us to believe that the anthropologists may be wrong in this case.
Second, there’s a comparison here - it talks about different cultures/different moral codes. Does that comparison carry into the conclusion? That conclusion is about different cultures, but it isn’t about different moral codes. Rather, it’s about individual values being shared. Values and morals are close enough that there’s no gap there, but there is a difference between a moral code and the individual morals/values that make it up. In jumping from that whole (the code) to a part (the values), this argument commits a Whole to Part flaw. Any answer that suggests that while codes may be different, some individual values are shared will weaken this argument.
Finally, the conclusion is qualified - it applies only “as long as” distinct cultures exist. If distinct cultures don’t exist, then the conclusion doesn’t apply. This doesn’t lead us to an anticipated weaken answer, but rather an anticipated answer that doesn’t weaken the argument. Anything that talks about the condition attached to the conclusion not applying will not weaken this argument. Normally, that would make it a trap answer, but here in this Bizarro question, that means it would be correct.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Anthropologists rely on inadequate Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    If the Anthropologists are relying on inadequate translations, that calls an argument based on their understanding into question, weakening the argument.

  2. B
    As a result of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    The conclusion is predicated on there still being distinct cultures. This answer brings up the inevitability of everyone sharing the same culture. In that world, the conclusion doesn’t apply - which isn’t the same as being weakened! As an example, if we say, “As long as you study, then you’ll do well on the LSAT,” and you reply, “Well, I’m not planning on studying,” that doesn’t weaken our argument. It just means that our prediction doesn’t apply to your situation. As such, this answer doesn’t weaken the argument and is therefore correct in this Bizarro question.

  3. C
    Although specific moral values Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    This answer matches up with one of our anticipations. While different cultures may have different moral codes, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t elements of that code that are shared.

  4. D
    The anthropologists who have Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Similar to (A), since the argument relies on the opinion of the Anthropologists, any bias or flaw in their approach will weaken the argument.

  5. E
    What appear to be Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    This answer directly calls into question the conclusion, establishing that there are shared values between distinct cultures.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion