LR Question 14 Explanation
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Laura concludes that Fermat was neither lying nor mistaken when he claimed to have proven the theorem.
REASONING: Someone else did prove the theorem (therefore it was possible to prove the theorem.)
ANALYSIS: Laura makes the mistake of assuming that since it was possible for Fermat to have proven the theorem then Fermat must have proven the theorem.
It is possible that Fermat didn’t actually prove the theorem, even though someone else did later.
___________
- The fact that someone did prove the theorem does not contradict the idea that Fermat did. In fact it shows its is possible that Fermat did prove it. It doesn’t make it certain that Fermat proved the theorem, of course.
- Laura hasn’t said anything about the quality of Fermat’s character.
- CORRECT. For Fermat to have proven the theorem it is necessary that it was possible. But the mere fact that it was possible doesn’t mean that Fermat actually did prove the theorem.
- Everyone can figure out what provable means: possible to prove true.
- Laura doesn’t mention either of these two phenomena. Joseph made the mistake of thinking that a true claim (the theorem can be proven) was false, but that doesn’t have much to do with Laura’s reasoning.
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 run LSAT Hacks, and got a 177 on the LSAT. The single best thing I've ever made is the set of LSAT Mastery seminars. They show you how to think like a 170+ scorer when doing questions. Get them here: Mastery Seminars
I guarantee you'll like them, or you get your money back within 7 days. There's no risk. Check the reviews, people have said they improved within a few days.
---------
Photos and Updates: You can follow me on Instagram here
For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.
