PrepTest 138
[lcid:3649] Prep Test 138 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2
Logical reasoning
Question prompt
Studies have found that
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: E
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Errors in Reasoning Questions
Answer choices
-
Aoverlooks the possibility that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. The argument concludes that crying reduces emotional stress, it doesn't establish it as true/a premise. So an answer that's conditioned on that being true ("if crying has . . . ") is wrong. -
Bconfuses a condition that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. The argument is causal, not conditional, so this illegal reversal answer is incorrect. -
Cfails to adequately address Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. If we rephrase this answer to include the language from the stimulus, it would state that, "fails to address the possibility that even if crying reduces stress, reducing stress may lead to crying." But the argument doesn't overlook that possibility because that possibility doesn't undercut the argument—even if the causality flows in both directions, the conclusion could still be correct. -
Dfails to adequately distinguish Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. Since the argument doesn't establish causality (it assumes it in the conclusion), there aren't any factors that are definitely jointly responsible for causing a phenomenon. -
Etakes for granted that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E matches the stem
Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument
Valid or Flawed:
Flawed
Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning
Stimulus Summary:
Tears have certain hormones made during times of stress. Crying gets rid of them. So crying must relieve stress.
Answer Anticipation:
Whenever an argument reaches a causal conclusion, you should start by considering a correlation/causation flaw. This conclusion talks about crying having an "effect of reducing," which is causal language, so it's time to check the premises for correlations.
And the premises are correlative! The argument establishes that the human body produces certain hormones in times of stress—that's a correlation. It doesn't state the hormones cause stress, or that the stress causes the body to release these hormones—just that the hormones are produced in times of stress. However, in concluding that removing these hormones will relieve stress, the argument assumes a causal relationship between them.
Since we have a jump from a correlation to causation, we should look for that in the answers.
Answer Explanation:
This argument highlights the correlation/causation flaw. It assumes that because hormones are present in times of stress, that those hormones cause stress, and thus removing them from the body will reduce stress.
Key Takeaway:
Whenever an argument has a causal conclusion, you should immediately consider a correlation/causation flaw. As one of the most common flaws on the test, you're likely to find one! (The exception? When there are causal premises.)
What this tests
Discussion
-
Why is A incorrect? 1 reply
Started by Eugene
-
C vs. E 5 replies
Started by sal8907