LSAT 156 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q5

LR Question 5 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Zobel: Peterson’s analytic concepts are wrong and …

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Peterson’s analytic concepts are wrong and should be rejected.

REASONING: Peterson’s students are biased because of their training and emotional attachment, so they can’t evaluate her ideas objectively.

ANALYSIS: Notice what Zobel actually shows. She spends the whole argument explaining why Peterson’s students are biased: they’re trained in a way that makes them emotionally attached and unable to judge her ideas objectively.

But that doesn’t tell us whether Peterson’s ideas are actually wrong.

So there’s a jump there. The conclusion is about the truth of Peterson’s concepts, but the evidence is only about the bias of some people who support them. Even if those students are biased, the ideas themselves could still be correct.

___________

1. Zobel’s qualifications aren’t the issue. There’s simply nothing to work with here.
2. CORRECT. Even if those students are biased, the ideas themselves could still be correct.
3. It doesn’t matter whether any psychoanalyst can provide a completely objective assessment. You can still evaluate the truth of a claim without being 100% objective.
4. Obvious to who? There’s certainly nothing in the stimulus that suggests that, even if the tone does read petty.
5. Careful. Zobel never said the concepts are biased, they said the students are biased. They haven’t actually said what’s wrong with the concepts – that’s the issue.