LSAT 119 – Section 2 – Question 14

LSAT 119 - Section 2 - Question 14

June 2005

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:00

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
PT119 S2 Q14
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
4%
158
B
4%
159
C
5%
157
D
0%
142
E
88%
164
126
139
152
 +Easier 144.676 +SubsectionEasier

Roger Bacon, the thirteenth-century scientist, is said to have made important discoveries in optics. He was an early advocate of hands-on experimentation, and as a teacher warned his students against relying uncritically on the opinions of authorities. Nevertheless, this did not stop Bacon himself from appealing to authority when it was expedient for his own argumentation. Thus, Bacon’s work on optics should be generally disregarded, in view of the contradiction between his statements and his own behavior.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that Bacon’s work on optics should be disregarded, even though it’s generally respected. His reasoning is that Bacon appealed to authority to support his arguments, despite hypocritically warning others not to do so.

Identify and Describe Flaw
This is a cookie-cutter attacking the source of the argument (ad hominem) flaw. The author attacks the source of certain ideas about optics, without attacking the ideas themselves.

A
presumes, without providing justification, that authority opinion is often incorrect
The author doesn’t make any presumptions about how often expert authority is (or isn’t) correct. His argument is based on Bacon’s inconsistency in sometimes relying on expert authority and sometimes not.
B
attacks Bacon’s uncritical reliance on authority opinion
The author’s critique isn’t that Bacon relies on authority opinion. It’s that he’s inconsistent about doing so: sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn’t.
C
uses Bacon’s remarks to his students as evidence of his opinions
Bacon’s remarks to his students could legitimately be used as evidence of his opinions. The author’s flaw is thinking that Bacon’s other opinions can be used to discredit his work on optics.
D
ignores the fact that thirteenth-century science may not hold up well today
On the contrary, the author’s entire argument is meant to discredit the work of a thirteenth-century scientist.
E
criticizes Bacon’s character in order to question his scientific findings
The author accuses Bacon of hypocrisy in order to undermine Bacon’s findings about optics. This is the cookie-cutter ad hominem flaw: Bacon’s other opinions or character traits aren’t relevant to his discoveries about optics.

The question stem reads: The reasoning in the argument is flawed because of the argument… This is a Weaken question.

The author beings with context, saying that Roger Bacon is a 13-century scientist who is said to have made important optics discoveries. They also claim he preached both hands-on experimentation and not uncritically relying on the opinion of authority to his students. However, the author notes that Bacon would appeal to authority when it was expedient (beneficial) for Bacon's argumentation. So Mr. Bacon was a bit of a hypocrite. The author concludes that Bacon's scientific work must be disregarded because of his hypocritical behavior.

Immediately this jumps out as an ad hominem attack, using someone's character instead of their position. In this case, the author claims we should disregard Bacon's work. Why? Because, on the authors' account, Bacon had some unsavory personality traits. When we attack opponents' arguments or work, our argument needs to be directed at that argument or work. In this case, the author has only provided reasons to think Bacon is a hypocrite and no evidence to discredit the validity of Bacon's discoveries. If this were a sufficient assumption question, we would need a premise like Hypocritie -> disregard work on optics, to bridge the gap between Bacon's personality and his work.

Answer Choice (A) is wrong because the author does not presume the authority's opinion is incorrect. If we turn to the stimulus, the author has nothing to say about whether authority opinion is correct or incorrect.

Answer Choice (B) is incorrect because the author does not actually attack the fact that Bacon relied on authority opinion. The author attacks Bacon for saying one thing and doing another. The author might think that relying on authority opinion is an acceptable practice while still taking issue with Bacon's hypocrisy.

Answer Choice (C) is incorrect because the author does not use bacon remarks to his students to make an inference of Bacon's opinions. He uses Bacon's comments to infer that he is a hypocrite.

Answer Choice (D) is incorrect because the argument is based on Bacon's character - not on whether or not thirteenth-century science holds up well today. Additionally, (D) would not be a problem for the argument as it lends some (minor) credence to the conclusion that Bacon's work should be disregarded.

Correct Answer Choice (E) is our prephase. The author criticizes Bacon's character (the hypocrisy) in order to question his scientific findings (his work on optics).

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 119 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply