PrepTest 136

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
NA/Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
B: I hate my job, but it's too risky to quit.

M: The risk is that you won't find a new job and will be unhappy, but you already are, so quit.

Answer Anticipation:
Morgenstern's argument is that Brooks will be no worse off if he quits his job. After all, he risks being unhappy, but he's already unhappy—the same outcome!

What Morgenstern doesn't address, however, is that someone can be different types of unhappy. Unhappy but employed, collecting a paycheck and not stressed about paying bills, might be much better than unhappy and unemployed, stressed out about how you're going to afford to live. In treating all unhappiness the same, Morgenstern's advice to Brooks leaves something to be desired.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that Morgenstern treats all unhappiness as the same, despite most people's lived experiences. There could be a big difference between unhappy and employed, and unhappy and unemployed.

Key Takeaway:
This question is interesting in that both speakers talk about risk, but there's no shift in the meaning there—many LSAT questions do feature such a shift. Whenever you're about to pick an answer about a shift in meaning, make sure you can clearly define the different definitions that each speaker is using.

Incorrect. Morgenstern presents a reason that quitting is the right course of action, so it doesn't assume the conclusion (a circular argument).

Incorrect. Morgenstern addresses risk and unhappiness, which are the two ideas brought up by Brooks, so there's no misconstrual here.

Incorrect.

Incorrect. Morgenstern's conclusion is about Brooks and his situation, so it doesn't reach a generalization.