LSAT 17, Logical Reasoning II, Q22, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: On Saturday Melvin suggested that Jerome take the following…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Cost is not the real reason for Jerome’s objection.

REASONING: Jerome makes the same objection no matter where Melvin unexpectedly proposes that Jerome go.

ANALYSIS: The argument missed the point. It is the unexpected nature of the vacations that are most troublesome to Jerome. He has to lose wages since he has no time to book vacation days. The location Melvin proposes is generally irrelevant since the proposals are always unexpected.

It’s true that some locations have lower gas costs but wages are almost certainly the main cost.

Jerome could make the same objection each time because Melvin makes the same mistake each time.

___________

1. The conclusion is about the motives for Jerome’s behavior so it is quite relevant for the argument to focus on that.
2. The argument is about Jerome’s motives. This answer choice is about Melvin’s finances. Fail.
3. This is tempting but Jerome may not prefer trips planned far in advance. He just might appreciate a slightly longer period of notice. Melvin gave him only two days!
4. The argument didn’t claim that Jerome had two reasons. It claimed that his professed reason was false and that there must be some other reason. Possibly just one.
5. CORRECT. Yes. The argument does not at all examine Jerome’s claim about cost. Jerome could be correct every time he gives the same objection because Melvin’s behavior is also the same each time.

Recap: The question begins with “On Saturday Melvin suggested that Jerome take the following”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Flaw questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.

---