LSAT 64, Logical Reasoning II, Q2, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Principle: If you sell an item that…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Wilton committed fraud.

REASONING: Wilton didn’t know whether the bicycle was good, but he said it was. If you know something is not good and say it is good, then you commit fraud.

ANALYSIS: Wilton was just reckless. For all he knew, the bicycle might have been good; he just got unlucky. It would only have been fraud if Wilton was sure the bicycle wasn’t good.

___________

1. Why would Wilton have tried to fix the brakes if he got the chance? He didn’t know there was anything wrong with them.
2. Fraud is a flexible word. Fraud can be worth $1 or $1,000,000,000.
3. Defective is clear both times. It means: not working.
4. You can commit fraud even if the other person doesn’t believe you. The principle doesn’t say anything about the buyer’s belief.
5. CORRECT. Lying means saying something you definitely know is false. Wilton just took a risk. As far as he knew, the bike could have been fine.

LawHub Order

LawHub Order

---