PrepTest 156

[lcid:3721] Prep Test 156 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

People would not follow Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

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

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Strategy Overview

Argument or facts? Always argument, so identify premises and conclusions of argument Diagrammable?
If yes, diagram out premises and conclusion. Note key identifiable characteristics of argument (How many premises? Quantifiers? Ands/ors? Didn't reverse or negate?). Can also convert specific terms in diagram to As, Bs, Cs, Ds, etc.
Eliminate an answer choice as soon as you notice it doesn't possess a key identifiable characteristic the passage possesses Diagram remaining until you find a matching flaw
If not, paraphrase what the flaw is
Checking to see if a common logical fallacies is committed is very helpful Select answer choice that has the same flaw

Answer Anticipation

Although this argument features two "if-then" statements, most test-takers would find this question easier if they avoid diagramming. And that's because there's a very common "concept switch" that occurs between the premise and the conclusion. The premise tells us that people wouldn't follow leaders if they "felt" like there wasn't anything to gain by following those leaders. But the conclusion asserts that even very bad leaders must "bring some good" to their followers. Do these quotes help you see the concept switch? The premise is about what people think will happen. But the conclusion is about what actually happens. Of course, what we think will happen doesn't always end up happening. Even if we think following a leader will benefit us, that doesn't mean following the leader will actually benefit us. So, we should look for an answer choice that features an argument in which the author assumes that a certain result will occur because people think the result will occur.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Because people expound upon Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem

    This argument also commits the flaw we identified in the passage! Like the passage, this premise is about what people think. The premise says that people will only "expound upon theories they believe are true." Also, like the passage, the conclusion assumes that what people think is true must actually be true. The conclusion asserts that theories that are expounded upon must contain "at least a grain of truth." And, like the passage, this is flawed reasoning. Even if people believe their leaders will benefit them or that their theories are true, these leaders may not benefit the people, and these theories may not be true.

    Because this so closely matches our anticipated flaw, we can justifiably select (A) and move on to the next question.

  2. B
    Because there is some Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    Unlike the passage, this argument's premise isn't about what people think or believe. Instead, this argument's premise establishes that there is actually "some good" in even the worst circumstances. So, even though this argument is also flawed (it commits a "concept switch" between what's true in circumstances and what's true for people), it doesn't commit the same flaw as the passage.

  3. C
    To be a worthy Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    This argument's premise isn't about what people think or believe, so it can't commit the same flaw as the passage. Instead, this argument's premise tells us that leaders actually bring "some good" to people. Even though this argument is also flawed (it commits the converse flaw/illegal reversal), it doesn't commit the same flaw as the passage.

  4. D
    Because people can never Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    This answer choice is tempting, but it doesn't commit the same argument as the passage. Unlike the conclusion in the passage, this conclusion doesn't assume that something must be true simply because people think it's true. In order to commit the same flaw as the passage, this conclusion would need to assert that what people wish to be true is actually true.

  5. E
    Even leaders of scientific Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    This argument's premise isn't about what people think or believe, so it isn't flawed for the same reason as the passage. Even though the premise of this answer choice asserts that scientific leaders are influenced by their predecessors, it never claims that these leaders think or believe that something is true due to this influence. Even though this argument is also flawed (the premises don't establish that the influence lasts forever), it doesn't commit the same flaw as the passage.

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.

View all discussions Start a discussion