LSAT 103 – Section 1 – Question 01

LSAT 103 - Section 1 - Question 01

September 1998

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:06

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
PT103 S1 Q01
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
8%
160
B
3%
156
C
1%
158
D
86%
165
E
2%
158
130
142
154
 +Medium 147.884 +SubsectionMedium

Three-year-old Sara and her playmate Michael are both ill and have the same symptoms. Since they play together every afternoon, Sara probably has the same illness as Michael does. Since Michael definitely does not have a streptococcal infection, despite his having some symptoms of one, the illness that Sara has is definitely not a streptococcal infection either.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Sara definitely does not have a strep infection, despite having some symptoms of one. Why? Because Sara has the same symptoms as Michael, and the two of them play together every day. This leads to the sub-conclusion that Sara probably has the same illness as Michael. And Michael definitely doesn’t have a strep infection.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author draws a conclusion about what must definitely be the case based on evidence about what is probably the case. The conclusion is that Sara “definitely” doesn’t have strep, because Michael definitely doesn’t have strep. However, Sara and Michael only “probably” have the same illness.

A
presupposes what it sets out to prove
The author doesn’t presuppose that Sara doesn’t have strep—this conclusion is reached based on evidence about Sara’s symptoms matching with those of her playmate Michael, who doesn’t have strep.
B
mistakes the cause of a particular phenomenon for the effect of that phenomenon
The author isn’t making any claims about cause and effect.
C
fails to distinguish between acute streptococcal infections on the one hand, and less severe streptococcal infections on the other
The difference between acute and less severe strep infections isn’t relevant to the argument—the question is just whether Sara might have strep, not what type of strep she might have.
D
treats evidence that the conclusion is probably true as if that evidence establishes the certainty of the conclusion
The author reaches the conclusion that Sara definitely doesn’t have strep based on evidence that Sara probably has the same non-strep illness as Michael.
E
makes a general claim based on particular examples that do not adequately represent the respective groups that they are each intended to represent
The author never makes a general claim about any groups based on examples taken to be representative. The argument is just about individual children, groups are irrelevant.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 103 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply