LSAT - Law School Admission Argument Flaw Identification Questions and Answers

Question 1

City official: 'Since the implementation of the 'Midnight Basketball' program, which provides recreational activities for teenagers in the evenings, the rate of juvenile crime in our city has decreased by 15%.
This proves that the 'Midnight Basketball' program is a successful deterrent to juvenile crime.'
The reasoning in the city official's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it...

The reasoning in the city official's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it...

Accepted Answer

presumes that a correlation between two events establishes a causal relationship.

Answer

relies on statistical data that may be inaccurate or misleading.

Answer

fails to consider other programs that may have contributed to the decrease in crime.

Answer

does not specify the types of juvenile crimes that have decreased.

Question 2

Literary Critic: 'I have reviewed the last two novels by author Jane Doe, and both were poorly written, with convoluted plots and underdeveloped characters. It is clear from these examples that Jane Doe is an author incapable of writing a compelling novel.'

The literary critic's argument is flawed because it...

Accepted Answer

draws a sweeping conclusion based on a small and potentially unrepresentative sample.

Answer

attacks the author's character rather than her work.

Answer

relies on the subjective judgment of a single critic.

Answer

fails to define what constitutes a 'compelling novel'.

Question 3

A university's policy states: 'Any student who wishes to graduate with honors must have a grade point average of 3.5 or higher.' Susan is a student at the university with a grade point average of 3.8. Therefore, the university will certainly grant Susan graduation with honors.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed because it...

Accepted Answer

confuses a condition that is required for an outcome with a condition that guarantees the outcome.

Answer

overlooks the possibility that there are other requirements for graduating with honors.

Answer

assumes that Susan's grade point average will not change before graduation.

Answer

relies on a university policy that may be subject to change.

Question 4

Political Analyst: 'Councilman Thompson's proposal to fund a new public park is fiscally irresponsible. We cannot trust his judgment on public spending, as it was recently revealed that he has significant personal credit card debt and recently declared bankruptcy. Therefore, the city council should reject his proposal.'

The analyst's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?

Accepted Answer

It attacks the councilman's personal financial situation instead of the merits of his proposal.

Answer

It fails to provide any evidence that the park proposal itself is fiscally irresponsible.

Answer

It assumes that personal financial management skills are relevant to managing public funds.

Answer

It does not consider the potential benefits that a new public park could bring to the city.

Question 5

Advertisement: 'Our new pain reliever, SwiftRelief, is the best on the market because no other pain reliever has been proven to work faster. When you are in pain, you should demand the best.'

The advertisement's reasoning is flawed because it...

Accepted Answer

equivocates on the meaning of the word 'best'.

Answer

appeals to the emotions of potential customers rather than to logic.

Answer

fails to consider the potential side effects of the pain reliever.

Answer

assumes that speed of relief is the only important quality for a pain reliever.

Question 6

Sociologist: 'Every member of the research team is an expert in their respective field—we have a leading statistician, a renowned ethnographer, and a developmental psychologist with decades of experience. Therefore, the research team as a whole is guaranteed to be an expert team.'

The reasoning is flawed because it...

Accepted Answer

assumes that properties of the individual parts of a group necessarily apply to the group as a whole.

Answer

appeals to the authority of the researchers without providing evidence for their claims.

Answer

fails to consider that the members' areas of expertise might not be relevant to the research topic.

Answer

relies on the ambiguous term 'expert'.