LSAT 31, Logical Reasoning II, Q4, LSATHacks

LR Question 4 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: A favorable biography of a politician omits certain…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Strengthen

CONCLUSION: For a biographer, this kind of ignorance cannot be used to evade blame for misleading readers.

REASONING: Everyone knew certain facts about a politician. The biographer didn’t include them in his biography: he claimed he didn’t know about the facts.

ANALYSIS: The right answer choice lets us blame the author. A lot of the wrong answer choices talk about “not blaming” or blaming “only if” (a necessary condition). 

We need a sufficient condition for blaming. Always remember what conclusion you’re trying to support. 

___________

1. We’re trying to blame the author. And we’re talking about an omission and not about the book’s popularity.
2. The problem is that the biographer left out facts. We don’t know if readers actually misperceived anything. 
3. We’re trying to blame the author. This would let us “not blame” him.
4. This is not helpful. Almost everyone had access to the facts, not just the author.
5. CORRECT. The facts were widely available and the author did omit them: so we can blame him.

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.