QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: The claims are false.
REASONING: No scientific study supports the claims.
ANALYSIS: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. An idea isn’t wrong just because it hasn’t yet been proven correct.
The claims about ginseng could be true even though we don’t yet have any evidence to support them.
- This refers to an ad hominem argument. An example would be ‘the claims about ginseng are wrong because marketers are scum.’
- CORRECT. Exactly. Things are true or false, whether or not we believe it. Gravity was always true even when we hadn’t discovered it.
- Irrelevant. There’s no sample mentioned. The argument is talking about all ginseng. A unrepresentative sample would be a few ginseng plants out of the millions that exist.
- It doesn’t matter whether people enjoy the tea. The conclusion referred to the claims about stress.
- Tempting. But the conclusion wasn’t about whether the tea reduced stress. It was about whether ginseng reduced stress.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly