LSAT 114 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q8

LR Question 8 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Pundit: The only airline providing service for our town announced…

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption/Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: We don’t need to listen to the officials who claim we should fly more.

REASONING: The officials drove to an out of town meeting.

ANALYSIS: There are two criticisms that work. First, the officials’ advice might be good, even if the officials aren’t following it. The pundit is making an ad hominem attack: claiming their argument is bad because they were hypocrites.

Second, it could be that the officials had good reason to drive. Maybe the out of town meeting was 10 minutes out of town. It wouldn’t make sense to fly.

___________

1. This is an assumption made in the officials’ argument. The pundit is not arguing we should try to keep the airline.
2. The pundit didn’t seem too concerned with what options the airline had. The main question was: should we listen to the officials?
3. It doesn’t matter who paid for the trip. The pundit’s main point was that they didn’t fly.
4. It doesn’t matter which option was more expensive. The officials argued that more people should fly, and the officials didn’t fly. That’s the critic’s main point.
5. CORRECT. The critic is assuming that his ad hominem attack is sufficient to disprove the officials’ argument. Ad hominem almost never makes a good argument.