LSAT 117 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q20

LR Question 20 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Advertisement: Each of the Economic Merit Prize winners …

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: The Acme retirement plan is probably good for anyone whose needs are similar to the prize winners.

REASONING:

• Every prize winner from the past 25 years is covered by the plan.
• These successful economists have clearly recognized that the plan provides financial security.

ANALYSIS: The argument is basically assuming that the prize winners have Acme because they think it’s a good retirement plan.

It’s not immediately obvious that this is what the argument is saying. But when they write “have thus clearly recognized” the plan’s greatness because they all have it, this means that they think the economists chose the plan because they recognize how good it is.

But simply being covered by a plan does not mean you chose it.

Maybe their employers selected it for them. If so, the fact that they have Acme tells us nothing about whether they think it is a good plan.

___________

1. The ad never claims Acme is the only good retirement plan or that everyone uses it.
2. There could be several good retirement plans. The conclusion is only that Acme is probably a good plan, not the best or only good one.
3. This might seem tempting because the ad is talking about experts (economists), so it looks like an appeal to authority. But the ad never says the economists endorsed the conclusion that “Acme is good for everyone with similar retirement needs.” At most, the ad assumes the economists think Acme is good for themselves. So the flaw isn’t that the “Experts said so.”
4. CORRECT. The argument assumes that at least some prize winners deliberately selected the Acme plan. If the plan was chosen for them by their employers, then their being covered by Acme tells us nothing about whether they think it offers a financially secure future.
5. The conclusion already limits itself to people with retirement needs similar to those of the prize winners. It doesn’t assume everyone’s needs are identical.