QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption
CONCLUSION: Flattery didn’t cause the promotions.
REASONING: Bosses usually notice flattery.
ANALYSIS: This is a bad argument. Don’t we all like being flattered, even if we know we’re being flattered? Maybe bosses promote people who flatter them.
But if we assume that flattery doesn’t work when it’s noticed, then this argument makes sense.
- This doesn’t tell us whether or not bosses promote people who flatter them. It just says bosses expect flattery.
- So? Bosses might ignore official guidelines when they promote people. This is irrelevant.
- The psychologist is talking about flattery that is noticed. That might still be effective.
- This seems to weaken the argument. Some bosses might promote flatterers because they mistakenly think the flatterers admire them.
- CORRECT. If flattery doesn’t influence bosses when it’s noticed, then the bosses must be promoting flatterers for some other reason.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly