Critical Analysis Flashcards
7 cards from real LNAT practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Critical Analysis flashcards as text
A passage argues: 'Allowing euthanasia will lead to pressure on the elderly to end their lives, then to killing disabled people, then eventually to state-mandated death.' This is an example of:
Answer: Slippery slope fallacy
The argument assumes each step will inevitably lead to the next without providing evidence for that chain of causation.
Which of the following is the best definition of a 'sound' argument?
Answer: An argument that is both valid and has all true premises
A sound argument must be logically valid (conclusion follows from premises) and all its premises must actually be true.
A researcher finds that schools with more computers have better test results. The local government then buys computers for all failing schools. What assumption underlies this decision?
Answer: The correlation between computers and results is causal, not merely associative
The government assumes computers cause better results, but the association could be explained by other variables like school funding or demographics.
Which of the following is NOT a legitimate way to strengthen an inductive argument?
Answer: Defining terms more precisely in the conclusion
Redefining terms in the conclusion does not add evidential weight; strengthening inductive arguments requires better evidence, not linguistic adjustments.
A politician says: 'My opponent voted against the defense budget, which shows he wants our country to be attacked.' What rhetorical technique is being used?
Answer: Unwarranted inference / straw man
Voting against a specific budget does not logically entail wanting the country to be attacked; the politician fabricates an extreme motive.
In formal logic, which of the following is a contrapositive of 'If it rains, then the game is cancelled'?
Answer: If the game is not cancelled, then it did not rain
The contrapositive of 'If P then Q' is 'If not Q then not P,' which is logically equivalent to the original statement.
A passage claims: 'No one has ever proven that ghosts do not exist; therefore, ghosts exist.' What fallacy does this commit?
Answer: Appeal to ignorance (argumentum ad ignorantiam)
The absence of disproof is not evidence of truth; this argument wrongly treats lack of counter-evidence as positive evidence.