LSAT 106 – Section 1 – Question 09

LSAT 106 - Section 1 - Question 09

June 1999

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 0:41

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question QuickView	Type	Tags	Answer Choices	Curve	Question Difficulty	Psg/Game/S Difficulty	Explanation
PT106 S1 Q09	+LR	Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw Fact v. Belief v. Knowledge +FvBvK	A 0% 152 B 0% 158 C 98% 167 D 1% 163 E 1% 155	125 133 142	+Easiest	152.148 +SubsectionHarder

Political commentators see recent policies of the government toward Country X as appeasement, pure and simple. This view is fundamentally mistaken, for polls show that most people disagree with the political commentators’ assessment of government policies toward Country X.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

The author argues that the political commentators’ assessment is mistaken, because most people disagree with them.

Identify and Describe Flaw

This is the cookie-cutter “fact vs. belief” flaw, where the author incorrectly assumes that because a group of people believe something to be true, it must be a factual reality. In short, she claims, “Most people believe X. Therefore, X is true.”

the term “policies” is used ambiguously in the argument

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of “equivocation,” where the author uses one term to mean multiple different things. But the other uses “policies” consistently, so (A) doesn’t describe the flaw in her argument.

the political commentators discussed in the passage are not identified

The fact that the commentators are not identified does not change their assessment or affect the author’s argument. So (B) cannot be the flaw.

a claim is inferred to be false merely because a majority of people believe it to be false

The commentators’ assessment is inferred to be false merely because “most people disagree” with it, or believe it to be false. But just because most people believe something, is not evidence that it is actually the case.

the claim that the political commentators are mistaken is both a premise and a conclusion in the argument

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of “circular reasoning,” where the premise is simply a restatement of the conclusion. But the claim noted in (D) is only the conclusion. The author’s premise and conclusion are distinct in this argument, so she doesn’t make this mistake.

it is assumed that what is true of persons individually is true of a country as a whole

This is the cookie-cutter “part vs. whole” flaw. But this doesn’t apply to this argument at all. The author never assumes that what is true of one part of the country is also true of the country as a whole.

LSAT 106 – Section 1 – Question 09

LSAT 106 - Section 1 - Question 09

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 106 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel