LSAT 29, Logical Reasoning I, Q14, LSATHacks

LR Question 14 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Prosecutor: Dr. Yuge has testified that, had the…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: There was enough light for Klein to make a reliable identification.

REASONING: The moon set at 1:45 AM. The robbery occurred between 1:15 and 1:30 AM. Dr. Yuge acknowledged that the moon was full enough to provide considerable light before it set.

ANALYSIS: This sounds very damning, but the prosecutor hasn’t established that there actually was light at the time. Is “considerable light” enough to make a reliable identification? Is Klein nearsighted? 

The right answer shows that the moon’s light could have been blocked by clouds. Surely you’ve been out on a moonlit night. Sometimes you can see and sometimes things interfere with the light. 

___________

1. The prosecutor claims to have conclusively shown that the robbery happened between 1:15 and 1:30. We’ll believe him.
2. The prosecutor is only arguing that there was enough light to possibly make an identification. Whether there was a risk that the identification was incorrect due to an uncanny resemble isn’t relevant (and this is pretty implausible anyway).
3. This is tempting but the conclusion is specifically about the amount of light. The prosecutor claims there was enough.
4. Dr. Yuge sounds like an expert. An expert could testify as to how bright the moon would have been even if they weren’t there.
5. CORRECT. The prosecutor ignores the possibility that something got in the way of the moon. 

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.