QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Similarly, any history book gives a distorted view of the past.
REASONING: One cannot understand one’s environment based on a single momentary perception. A glimpse of your environment gives you only a momentary perspective. And a history book will inevitably reflect the biases and prejudices of the author.
ANALYSIS: There are two arguments. We’re meant to understand that the first argument is correct. The second argument is supported by the fact that it is similar to the first argument.
It’s not a great argument, but that’s the structure.
- The author thinks that both pieces of reasoning mentioned are correct.
- The argument didn’t mention what would happen if either conclusion were false.
- CORRECT. The second argument resembles the first. If the first is good then presumably that helps make the case for the second. Bias is like a fragmentary glimpse: you only get part of the picture.
- Nope. What group of characteristics would that be? The stimulus didn’t mention anything like this.
- There are actually two types of human cognition (thinking) mentioned: brief glimpses of a moment and personal bias. They’re two very different phenomena.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly