LSAT 110 – Section 2 – Question 11

LSAT 110 - Section 2 - Question 11

June 2001

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

Target time: 1:21

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
PT110 S2 Q11	+LR	Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw Link Assumption +LinkA Eliminating Options +ElimOpt	A 2% 162 B 21% 163 C 75% 167 D 2% 160 E 0% 158	134 150 165	+Medium	145.606 +SubsectionMedium

Some psychologists claim that, in theory, the best way to understand another person would be through deep empathy, whereby one would gain a direct and complete grasp of that person’s motivations. But suppose they are right; then there would be no way at all to achieve understanding, since it is psychologically impossible to gain a direct and complete grasp of another person’s motivations. But obviously one can understand other people; thus these psychologists are wrong.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that psychologists who claim empathy is the best way, in theory, to understand someone else are wrong. He concludes this by arguing that since it’s impossible to gain a direct and complete grasp of another person’s motivations, there’d be no way to achieve understanding according to the psychologists, and since one can understand people, the psychologists are wrong.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The author reasons that if the psychologists are right, we can’t achieve understanding. However, this reasoning is flawed because the psychologists didn’t argue that deep empathy is the only way to understand people, only that it’s the best way. Also, the author’s reasoning that the psychologists are wrong is flawed. Just because the theoretically best way to do something wouldn’t work in practice, it doesn’t mean it’s not the theoretically best way.

fails to adequately define the key phrase “deep empathy”

The term “deep empathy” is defined right after it’s first mentioned.

assumes something that it later denies, resulting in a contradiction

The author erroneously assumes that the psychologists’ claim is contradictory to fact. However, the author never denies this assumption.

confuses a theoretically best way of accomplishing something with the only way of accomplishing it

This flaw is committed. The author reasons that if the psychologists are right, understanding can’t be achieved. However, the psychologists never argued that deep empathy is the only way to understand people. They only argued that it’s the best way.

accepts a claim on mere authority, without requiring sufficient justification

The author doesn’t accept any claims on mere authority. The author argues that the psychologists’ claim is incorrect.

fails to consider that other psychologists may disagree with the psychologists cited

The author’s argument isn’t concerned with other psychologists. The author only argues that the psychologists who claim that deep empathy is the best way to understand another person are wrong.

LSAT 110 – Section 2 – Question 11

LSAT 110 - Section 2 - Question 11

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 110 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel