LSAT 120 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q21

LR Question 21 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Administrator: Because revenue fell by 15 percent this year…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: We must reduce salaries.

REASONING: We could reduce the budget shortfall using at least two methods: eliminating teaching positions or cutting faculty salaries. We will not eliminate teaching positions.

ANALYSIS: This argument presents a false dichotomy. The administrator discusses two areas where spending could be cut. He shows that teaching positions will not be eliminated, and therefore concludes that salaries will be reduced instead.

But why couldn’t the university cut fuel costs, investment, heating, or food…or even the salaries of administrators? The administrator hasn’t shown that the two options he names are the only two options.

___________

1. The administrator didn’t compare savings – he said there could only be savings from reducing faculty salaries because no jobs would be cut.
2. CORRECT. Indeed. There are many ways to cut a budget.
3. The administrator does not say how deep the cuts will be.
4. Actually, he presumes that no faculty members will leave their jobs.
5. This is actually impossible, if the administrator’s claim that no jobs will be cut is true.

Recap: The question begins with “Administrator: Because revenue fell by 15 percent this year”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Flaw questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.