• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

LSAT Hacks

The Explanations That Should Have Come With The LSAT

  • Start Here
    • About
  • LSAT Explanations
  • LSAT Courses
  • Tutoring
    • Tutoring
    • Mastery seminars
    • Course
    • Books
  • Blog
  • Login
LSAT Explanations » LSAT Preptest 29 » Logical Reasoning 1 » Question 23

LSAT 29, Logical Reasoning I, Q23, LSATHacks

LSAT 29 Explanations

LR Question 23 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Linda says that, as a scientist, she…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: At least some people who appreciate poetry are illogical. 

REASONING: Most scientists are logical and Linda says no scientists appreciate poetry.

ANALYSIS: Linda is a very illogical scientist. She notes that logical scientists don’t like poetry. 

But that doesn’t mean that at least some people who do like poetry are illogical. Linda makes a bad argument.

It’s like saying that because children are not ten feet tall then at least some people who are not children are ten feet tall. 

Another element is that Linda claims no scientist likes poetry. But that’s a very strong claim and Linda provides no evidence apart from being a scientist. Being a scientist doesn’t make her an expert on who likes poetry. 

A relevant expert is someone who has studied a particular area. They can be expected to speak about it competently. 

___________

  1. This is a good argument. Ralph is a relevant expert and can be expected to know if marsupials lay eggs. 
  2. CORRECT. This argument sounds so good…but it’s wrong. First, Franz can’t speak for all fathers: he isn’t an expert on what all fathers think. Maybe some want their kids to eat candy at bedtime. And Franz also hasn’t given us any evidence that children are demanding candy. 
  3. This is a good argument. Yuri is a relevant expert. 
  4. Xi is a relevant expert and makes a good argument.
  5. This is very close. Betty can’t speak for all corporate executives. But the conclusion is different. The stimulus went from logical to illogical. Betty keeps the terms the same; she goes from honest to honest. 

Previous Question
Table Of Contents
Next Question




Free Logical Reasoning lesson

Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

I created LSATHacks, and scored a 177 on the LSAT.

Check out LSATHacks All Access

It's your one stop shop for LSAT prep: 1000s more explanations, and courses for both intro and advanced students. Lifetime access to everything on LSATHacks and anything I add. Plus a consult with me to get you started on the right track.
---------
Socials and Updates: If you have any questions, you can can check out my TikTok videos or email me.

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

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Manjot Singh says

    July 6, 2017 at 12:15 pm

    Can you clarify why E is wrong? I had trouble with this one.

    Reply
    • TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says

      July 9, 2017 at 6:32 pm

      The final premise and conclusion of the stimulus are as follows:
      Premise: Scientist MOST Logical
      Conclusion: Appreciate poetry SOME Illogical
      Notice how the conclusion negates the premise’s adjective “logical” to “illogical”.

      (E) says:
      Premise: Corporate Exec MOST Honest
      Conclusion: Pay taxes SOME Honest
      Notice how in this case, the premise’s adjective “honest” is not negated in the conclusion, but stays the same.

      So (E) doesn’t entirely match the reasoning in the stimulus.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Free LSAT Email Course

My best LSAT tips, straight to your inbox


New! LSATHacks All Access: Get every course on LSATHacks + members only explanations

LSATHacks Pro

Get a higher score with LSATHacks

LSAT Course, LSAT Mastery seminars, and 3,000 extra explanations. All for only $760 $349, satisfaction guaranteed. Sign up here: https://lsathacks.com/all-access/

Testimonials

Your emails are tremendously helpful. - Matt

Thanks for the tips! They were very helpful, and even make you feel like you studied a bit. Great insight and would love more! - Haj

Dear Graeme: MUCH MORE PLEASE!! Your explanations are very clear, and you give equal importance to why answers are WRONG, as well as why THE ANSWER is right!! Very well done. Thank you for all your efforts - Tom

These have been awesome. More please!!! - Caillie

The course was immensely helpful and has eased my nerves a lot. - Lovlean

© Copyright 2023 LSAT Hacks. All Rights Reserved. | FAQ/Legal

Disclaimer: Use of this site requires official LSAT preptests; the explanations are of no use without the preptests. If you do not have the accompanying preptests, you can find them here: LSAT preptests
LSAT is copyright of LSAC. LSAC does not review or endorse specific test preparation materials or services and has not reviewed this site.
×
Item Added to your Cart!
There are no products
Continue Shopping