LSAT 149 – Section 1 – Question 12

LSAT 149 - Section 1 - Question 12

December 2017

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:04

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
PT149 S1 Q12
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
74%
164
B
2%
152
C
22%
158
D
1%
156
E
1%
150
139
150
161
 +Medium 143.093 +SubsectionEasier

Legislator: The recently passed highway bill is clearly very unpopular with voters. After all, polls predict that the majority party, which supported the bill’s passage, will lose more than a dozen seats in the upcoming election.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The legislator hypothesizes that voters don’t like the highway bill. She bases this on a correlation: the majority party both supported the bill’s passage and is predicted to lose more than a dozen seats in the upcoming election.

Identify and Describe Flaw
This is a “correlation doesn’t imply causation” flaw, where the legislator sees a correlation and concludes that one thing causes the other without ruling out alternative hypotheses. Specifically, she overlooks two key alternatives:
(1) The causal relationship could be reversed—maybe the majority party’s unpopularity caused them to support the highway bill. Maybe the party supported the popular highway bill as a result of their poor poll performance!
(2) Some other factor could be causing the correlation—maybe the majority party is unpopular for other reasons and they also happen to support the highway bill!

A
gives no reason to think that the predicted election outcome would be different if the majority party had not supported the bill
This describes the legislator’s cookie-cutter “correlation proves causation” error. The legislator fails to establish that the majority party’s support of the bill is what caused the predicted election outcome. What if the party is unpopular for entirely unrelated reasons?
B
focuses on the popularity of the bill to the exclusion of its merit
The bill’s merit is not relevant to the legislator’s argument. She is focused on the bill’s popularity, not its actual content.
C
infers that the bill is unpopular from a claim that presupposes its unpopularity
The legislator does not presuppose the bill’s unpopularity; rather, she attempts to demonstrate it by introducing the information that a party that supported the bill is itself unpopular. (C) describes a “circular reasoning” flaw, which is not the error the legislator commits.
D
takes for granted that the bill is unpopular just because the legislator wishes it to be unpopular
The legislator gives no indication that she wishes the bill to be unpopular. For all we know, she could be a member of the majority party and a supporter of the bill!
E
bases its conclusion on the views of voters without establishing their relevant expertise on the issues involved
The legislator’s conclusion is entirely about voters’ views, regardless of the merits of these views or the voters’ qualifications to hold them. Her argument doesn’t rely at all on establishing the voters’ relevant expertise, so it doesn’t matter that she does not do this.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 149 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply