LR Question 18 Explanation, by LSATHacks
QUESTION TEXT: Mayor: A huge protest against plans to build a…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: The factory won't cause health problems.
REASONING: The protestors complaining about health problems were sent by developers who were worried about the value of their land.
ANALYSIS: This is an ad hominem argument. The author attacks the motives of the protestors, in order to claim that their conclusion is wrong.
This is never correct. It's possible the factory poses a health risk – maybe that's why developers chose to highlight that issue rather than another concern!
You must always attack the evidence and reasoning of your opponent, never their identity.
___________
- The argument didn't do this.
Example of Flaw: The protestors claim the factory will kill everyone in town. But it won't kill anyone. - The argument didn't do this either. Note that this isn't really a flaw: it's perfectly valid to persuade by pointing out harmful consequences.
Example of Flaw: We must build the factory. Otherwise the local economy will fail and house prices will drop. - CORRECT. This answer choice describes an ad hominem flaw. The author didn't say the protestors were wrong, she just said they were biased.
- It is a flaw to generalize from a small number of cases, but the argument didn't do this.
Example of Flaw: The factory will make everyone sick. These two homeless orphans developed a cough while living near a similar factory. - This is a flaw, but the argument didn't do it.
Example of flaw: You must admit that it's possible I'll win the lottery. Therefore it's 100% certain that I'll win the lottery.
Recap: The question begins with “Mayor: A huge protest against plans to”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. To practice more Flawed Reasoning questions, have a look at the LSAT Questions by Type page.
Hi, I'm Graeme Blake
Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.
I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle
If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.
---------
Updates:
For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.
The problem I have with the answer C is that it says some people whereas the arguments argues that it is most of the protestors. I correctly eliminated except C and E and was leaning towards C but due to its language i.e ‘Some’, I eliminated. Is the reason for overlooking this flaw in the answer C that it is best possible out of the 5?
“Some people” refers to the protestors. So it may help to read C as “The argument rejects….claim….because of protestors’ motivations”
Some is a good elimination answer on strengthen/weaken questions, because it could mean 1, and therefore provides weak support. But here it’s more like a pronoun. So what C is doing is like “Graeme said to choose C” vs. “He said to choose C”. No difference in meaning between these two, it’s just a way to reference the noun.