• 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 2 » Question 21

LSAT 29, Logical Reasoning II, Q21, LSATHacks

LSAT 29 Explanations

LR Question 21 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: All too many weaklings are also cowards,…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: There must be at least one person who is both a weakling and a fool. 

REASONING: Many weaklings are cowards and all but a few (most) cowards are fools. 

ANALYSIS: “Many” statements are basically just some statements. You can’t combine those with anything except a sufficient-necessary condition. It’s possible that people who are both cowards and weaklings are never fools. 

A parallel argument would be: Many iguanas are pets and most pets have fur (dogs and cats.) Therefore at least some iguanas have fur. 

___________

  1. This is a good argument though it could actually have said all weasels. Weasel ➞ carnivores ➞ non-herbivores
  2. This is a bad argument but only because it assumes that you have to be a saint or a moralist to live like saints or moralists. 
  3. CORRECT. This incorrectly tries to combine “some” statements. Painters and dancers might have no overlap, even if both groups overlap with musicians. 
  4. Virtuous ➞ Free ➞ Autonomous. This is a good argument.
  5. This is a good argument though they could have correctly concluded that “most voters are not opposed to stricter tariffs.”

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. Paul says

    February 7, 2021 at 8:07 pm

    I got really tripped up on this question because of the conclusion “There is at least one” qualifier in the stimulus vs “many are” qualifer in C. Should we not consider those to be qualitatively (if not quantitatively) different ?

    In other words, can I consider arguments components phrased like “many A are B” or “some A are B” to be legitimately parallel to an argument component phrased like “there must be at least one A that is B”? These feel like they should be non-parallel/unequal to one another.

    Reply
    • TutorRosalie (LSATHacks) says

      February 9, 2021 at 12:41 pm

      I’m not sure I understand what you mean exactly, but let me know if I answer your question or not. So for “at least one” that basically also means some/many/few. The funny thing about quantifiers is that a lot of them really mean the same thing. Some/many/few all mean somewhere between 1-49%. (0 = none; 50 = half; 51-99 = most; 100 = all).

      So for your examples, “many A are B” and “some A are B” are parallel to each other, but “there must be at least one A that is B” does not follow from that since you can’t make conclusions from two “some” statements.

      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