PrepTest 106
[lcid:3522] Prep Test 106 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3
Logical reasoning
Question prompt
It is common to
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: D
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Argument or Facts
Argument
Valid or Flawed
Valid
Question Type
Parallel Reasoning Questions
Stimulus Summary
When someone criticizes you, it’s common to call them a hypocrite, but that’s not relevant to whether their advice is good, so it’s irrational.
Answer Anticipation
You have to love these answer choices that take an interesting angle on a common flaw!
The argument here falls into a subset of the Attacking the Person flaw - accusations of hypocrisy. However, it doesn’t commit that flaw itself. Rather, it points out that someone being a hypocrite doesn’t make their advice bad, so it’s not a good response to criticism.
The big takeaway here? Let’s find an answer where it’s pointed out that someone being a hypocrite isn’t a rational reason to dismiss their advice/criticism.
Answer choices
-
AOther countries argue that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
This answer commits an Attacking the Person flaw itself, saying that an argument is irrational because it’s made by a hypocrite. Since this argument falls into the fallacy instead of pointing it out, we can eliminate it. -
BMy neighbor urges me Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
This answer doesn’t discuss any hypocritical action. Rather, it dismisses a recommendation because it hasn’t yielded results. -
CWhen one country accuses Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
This answer is about pointing out hypocrisy in an accuser to minimize reputational damage. It recommends that the accused attack the accuser, so it doesn’t point out the irrationality of relying on such an attack! -
DOne should not dismiss Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D matches the stem
This answer highlights that a rebuttal highlighting the hypocrisy of someone making an argument doesn’t speak to their argument. In other words, it argues against using an Attacking the Person/hypocrisy argument, mirroring the stimulus. This answer is therefore correct. -
EWe should not be Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
This answer advises people to not act hypocritically themselves - that’s distinct from pointing out that hypocrisy doesn’t invalidate an argument.
What this tests
Discussion
No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.