LSAT 105 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q26

LR Question 26 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Marion knows that the bridge on her usual route is closed ….

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Marion cannot avoid being late for work.

REASONING: She hates the train.

ANALYSIS: Marion can’t drive to work in time because of conflicting obligations. So the other option is the train. The argument concludes that because she hates the train, she’s going to be late (drive).

But why? Just because she dislikes it, doesn’t mean she won’t do it. I think everyone has had to do something they dislike to meet obligations. Hating something doesn’t mean you’ll refuse to do it.

___________

1. The stimulus never said Marion’s the only one who’s having issues because of the bridge closure.
   Example of flaw: Marion is the only one that’s affected by this bridge closure.
2. It’s not ignoring consequences – it’s aware of the consequences of each choice. Driving = late, train = on time but unpleasant.
   Example of flaw: Marion knows the bridge is closed, but she hasn’t thought through how to get to work on time.
3. The argument actually assumes the opposite – because Marion dislikes the train, she won’t take it, even if it avoids the negative result (being late).
   Example of flaw: People usually want to be on time, so Marion will definitely take the train to be on time.
4. CORRECT. Exactly, it assumes that because she hates the train, she won’t take it. It wrongly eliminates the train as an option even though it’s still possible.
5. There’s no irrational choices here – being on time to work is a good reason (at least for a majority of people).
   Example of flaw: Marion wouldn’t take the train unless she had a good reason.