QUESTION TEXT: Statistician: A financial magazine claimed that its…
QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen – Exception
CONCLUSION: We should be skeptical about the magazine’s conclusion.
REASONING: The sample is unrepresentative (it’s a financial magazine: readers are likely interested in finances) and the question is biased (“the joy of earning money”).
ANALYSIS: The correct answer makes a comparison to an irrelevant issue: social issues. The magazine was only comparing politics to finances. It didn’t claim finances were more important than any other issue.
- This does slightly strengthen the statistician’s argument. Demonstrating that someone is a frequent liar is more than just an ad hominem attack. We should be skeptical of a liar who generated all of the evidence supporting their argument.
- This supports the idea that this survey could be wrong, too.
- This shows that this survey doesn’t have the final word on this issue: other surveys disagree.
- This survey was biased and unrepresentative. So we have reason to be skeptical.
- CORRECT. The conclusion is only about whether politics or finances are most important. Social issues aren’t relevant to that comparison. The magazine didn’t claim that finances are the most important issue. They’re just more important than politics.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions