QUESTION TEXT: When surveyed about which party they would…
QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Most people want a parliament split between Liberals, Conservatives and Moderates.
REASONING: The survey found that 40% of people want Conservative, 20% want Moderate and 40% want Liberal.
ANALYSIS: This argument makes a whole-to-part flaw. The overall preferences of the electorate add up to 40/20/40. But that doesn’t mean that any individuals prefer that split. For instance, Conservative supporters probably want 100% conservatives to be elected, and Liberal supporters probably want 100% Liberals to be elected.
For a concrete example, the author of this piece would assume that every American wants a President who is half Republican and half Democrat. When in reality, half want a Republican, and half want a Democrat.
- This is a different flaw: moving from facts to moral judgement.
Example of flaw: Most people eat at least some junk food. So it is morally good for people to eat junk food.
- This is circular reasoning, a different flaw.
Example of flaw: The Conservatives should be elected because the Conservatives should be elected.
- CORRECT. This matches. The author took the overall survey preferences of the whole country and assumed each individual must feel the same way.
- The argument says “if the survey results are reliable.” So the author already accounted for this possibility.
- Nonsense. The evidence is very precise: 40%, 20%, 40%.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly