LSAT 117 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q9

LR Question 9 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Manager: When Sullivan was passed over for promotion …

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Sullivan wasn’t passed over for the promotion because he’s older than his competitors.

REASONING: People who are older than Sullivan have recently been promoted.

ANALYSIS: Imagine Sullivan is 50. And Sally is 60.

Sullivan didn’t get the promotion he applied for. Two months ago, Sally did get the promotion (a different one) she applied for.

The argument is saying: Sullivan didn’t get passed up for his promotion because he was older than his competition. Why? Because look, Sally got a promotion 2 months ago, and she’s even older than Sullivan!

But the conclusion is about Sullivan vs. his competition. So to figure out whether the company does compare the applicants’ ages, we’d have to know who Sally’s competition was!

If Sally’s competition was Greg, Suzie, and John, all of whom are older than 60, well then maybe the company does prefer younger applicants.

___________

1. The argument isn’t necessarily figuring out why Sullivan didn’t get promoted. It’s about whether age was the deciding factor. Whether or not Sullivan was qualified, he could’ve been passed over because of his age.
2. Age could have been one factor among many, but the argument specifically claims that age was not the deciding factor.
3. General associations between age and experience are irrelevant.
4. CORRECT. The manager assumes that promoting older employees proves age discrimination did not occur. But if those older employees had no younger competitors, their promotions tell us nothing about whether younger candidates are favored when there is direct competition.
5. Irrelevant. Confidentiality has no bearing on the reasoning about age.