LR Question 23 Explanation, by LSATHacks
QUESTION TEXT: Societies in which value is measured primarily in…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Non-industrial societies must tend to be unified.
REASONING: When societies use money to measure value, they fragment into isolated social units. But non-industrial societies do not use money as the main measure of value.
ANALYSIS: This is an incorrect negation. The premise is “money ➞ fragment”
We can’t conclude that not using money leads to not fragmenting. There could be many different reasons why a society might fragment. The right answer will have an incorrect negation.
___________
- This is a good argument. The argument isn’t saying that jackals and wolves can interbreed. It just points out that the premise by itself doesn’t prove that they can’t.
- This makes the mistake of assuming that what must be true on average must be true of every individual. Places further north tend to have fewer species. But exceptions are possible and Siberia might have more species than the desert does. But this isn’t an incorrect negation.
- This argument saves itself by saying “probably.” It’s still not good because it provides no evidence that arthropods are all like insects. But it isn’t a terrible argument.
- CORRECT. Poets ➞ metaphors is the premise. The conclusion is an incorrect negation. There could be people apart from poets who use metaphors (such as journalists.)
- This is a bad argument because it confuses what tends to be true with what is always true. A pencil might be more troublesome than a computer. But there is no incorrect negation.
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.
E is using the same trap expression ” they must tend”! Unfortunately I fell right into the trap even tho I KNEW that the negation is wrong and it’s what I am looking for in the correct answer. If E was saying ” but computers are not pencils” would choice E be a good choice? Thanks :)
E could be correct if it said: But computers are not more sophisticated than pencils, so computers must tend not to cause more problems than pencils. We’d need to have an incorrect negation to match the flaw in the stimulus. Hope that helps!
this is a BS question. doesnt make sense at all.
I assure you these words have meaning. If you read this and it seemed like gibberish then this is a great question to redo.
The question uses complicated language, but it does a simple incorrect negation. Same as if I said “All cats are animals. So anything which isn’t a cat must not be an animal”.
Note: This is an old comment but I wanted to clarify the point.