LSAT 104 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q25

LR Question 25 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: All any reporter knows about the accident is what…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: There is a reporter that can scoop the other reporters.

REASONING: Reporters only know what the press agent told them. The press agent hasn’t told every reporter everything.

If the press agent had told every reporter everything, then no reporter could scoop the others. No reporter can scoop another unless they know more than the others.

ANALYSIS: First, scoop is an old word that means: report a story first, or with more information.

Second, this is a bad argument. It’s possible the press agent told every reporter the same incomplete information. Maybe each reporter knows exactly 50% of the facts, and no one can scoop anyone.

___________

1. The press agent still could have given one reporter more information than the others, even if no reporter got complete information.
2. The conclusion was that a reporter “can” scoop the others. The argument never said that a reporter “would” scoop the others.
3. This is possible, if the press agent tells one reporter an extra fact.
    
   But a scoop could still happen. The press agent could tell a second reporter an additional fact, That reporter would know more than the rest, if they didn’t tell the fact to the other reporters.
4. This would happen if the press agent told the most knowledgeable reporter everything. But that reporter could scoop the others, if the rest weren’t as knowledgeable.
5. CORRECT. The press agent could have told each reporter the same 50% of the facts. Then no one could scoop anyone.

Recap: The question begins with “All any reporter knows about the accident is what”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Flaw questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.