LR Question 20 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Some people believe that good health is due to luck…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Good health is largely the result of making informed lifestyle choices.
REASONING: Studies show a correlation between education and good health.
ANALYSIS: Correlations cannot indicate causation on their own.
All of the wrong answer choices confuse the concept of average. Even if educated people tend to be healthy, some of them will still be sick.
___________
- The argument only claims that better education leads to better health on average. It is not making the extreme claim that every person without formal education will make bad lifestyle choices.
- A correlation only means that on average educated people are healthier. Obviously some people in that group will still get sick.
- The argument does not presume that everyone can make such choices. A sick baby obviously can’t make much of a choice. The argument is only making a claim about average levels of health.
- CORRECT. Maybe good luck lets people get an education and keeps them healthy. Or some other third factor causes both. Wealthy parents can afford both college tuition and doctors.
- Of course some will be. But on average, those who make poor lifestyle choices are less healthy.
Recap: The question begins with “Some people believe that good health is due to luck”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Flaw questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.
More Resources for Flaw Questions
- Flaw drills: Use these to practice making examples of abstract flaws.
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Flaw questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers flaw questions.
I presume it’s ok to equate “informed lifestyle choices” to “higher education,” especially considering that the main argumentative mechanism here is flawed causal reasoning?
You’re right that the flaw involves causal reasoning, but I wouldn’t necessarily say due to equating higher education with informed lifestyle choices. That’s part of the argument’s assumption.
The argument observes a correlation between education and health, then concludes that informed choices cause good health, presumably because educated people make informed choices. But it never proves that chain of causation.
That’s why D is correct. It points out that a third factor (e.g. socioeconomic status) could independently cause both higher education AND better health, without informed choices playing a causal role.