QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Most businesses that currently don’t have videoconferencing would benefit by buying it.
REASONING: Most companies that have bought videoconferencing equipment have benefitted.
ANALYSIS: This argument has a sample bias. It’s possible that the businesses that bought videoconferencing equipment knew they would benefit from it.
Meanwhile, the businesses that haven’t bought it have no use for videoconferencing, so they know they wouldn’t benefit.
- Not quite. The argument said that many businesses actually did benefit from the equipment, so the argument is stronger than this answer choice implies.
Example of flaw: Many businesses pay for expensive lunches for their managers. So clearly these lunches are worth the cost.
- This describes a mistaken reversal of a conditional statement. The argument didn’t do this. You should never pick this type of answer unless you’ve found a conditional reasoning error in the argument.
Example of flaw: Video conferencing will help businesses. So anything that isn’t video conferencing won’t help businesses.
- This is a different flaw.
Example of flaw: Johnson said the free money making machine will be useful because he likes the color of the machine. Johnson has made a stupid argument. Therefore it’s not a good idea to take the free money making machine.
- CORRECT. See the explanation above. Businesses that bought the equipment probably knew they had a use for it. Meanwhile, businesses that haven’t bought it probably realize they don’t have a use for it.
- This is a different flaw. The argument didn’t compare cost or value.
Example of flaw: Pizza costs more than water, which is free. So pizza is more useful than water.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly