LSAT 131 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q5

LR Question 5 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Challenger: The mayor claims that she has vindicated

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

ARGUMENTS: The challenger says the 8% increase in jobs was entirely due to the national government relocating an office to the city. The jobs all went to newcomers.

The mayor says the increase in jobs is the highest increase any mayor has had.

ANALYSIS: The challenger is saying “an increase happened, but the mayor didn’t cause it and the jobs didn’t go to locals.” The mayor just says “the increase was really big!”.

So, the mayor has failed to address the claim that they can’t take credit for the increase, and that the jobs didn’t go to locals.

___________

1. This isn’t the central point. The challenger wasn’t disputing whether or not jobs are important.
2. No one talked about jobs increasing by 8% of eligible voters. They just talked about overall jobs increasing 8%.
3. CORRECT. The mayor needs to show that they helped find jobs for locals. They failed to address the challenger’s claim that all the jobs went to out of towners.
4. The challenger didn’t say this! So this can’t be the flaw.
5. This is a different flaw, called a straw man argument.
   Example of flaw: The challenger says I smell bad! That’s mean of them! I use deodorant every day.
   (Challenger: …..? I didn’t say that.)