• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

LSAT Hacks

The Explanations That Should Have Come With The LSAT

  • Start Here
    • About
  • LSAT Explanations
  • LSAT Courses
  • Tutoring
    • Tutoring
    • Mastery seminars
    • Course
    • Books
  • Blog
  • Login
LSAT Explanations » LSAT Preptest 79 » Logical Reasoning 1 » Question 26

LSAT 79, Logical Reasoning I, Q26, LSATHacks

LSAT 79 Explanations

LR Question 26 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Some eloquent speakers impress their audiences with…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: No obscene speakers impress their audience.

REASONING: 

  1. Eloquent SOME impress with vividness.
  2. Obscene –> not eloquent

ANALYSIS: This is a bad argument. Eloquence and vividness are one way to impress, but the argument didn’t show that they’re the only way. For example, maybe you can shock an audience with enough obscenity that that will impress them.

The structure is:

  1. a SOME b
  2. c –> a
  3. c –> b

Here is an analogous argument:

  • Some people in Britain are rich
  • People in the USA are not in Britain
  • So, no one in the USA is rich

Hopefully the structure is clear. We have a “some” statement describing one way to get rich. Then, we have an “all” statement showing that a certain group isn’t part of that “some” statement. Then the error is assuming there was no other way to meet the goal.

This is a long question question. To go faster, you can skim the answers looking for a “some” and an “all”. If you don’t find those, the answer is almost certainly not correct. I skimmed right to E before testing any answer, and I tested E first. (I skipped C because the “some” was in the conclusion, whereas the original had a “none” conclusion.)

___________

  1. There are no “some” statements in this answer. And, this is a good argument!
    Structure:
    M –> MC
    This culture lacks M, so it lacks MC.
  2. This is a good argument!
    Structure:
    Serious –>
    one page per day
    Contrapositive: one page per day –> Serious
    Some authors write one page per day.
  3. This is a flawed argument. Its flaw is misunderstanding the word “some”. The author assumes that if some centers of industry are not small, then some must be small.
    That isn’t so. “Some” can be anywhere from 1 to all, so it could be that all centers of industry are not small. But, this isn’t the flaw that was made in the stimulus.
    Structure:
    *
    center commerce –> center of industry
    * center of industry SOME
    small city
    * Conclusion: center of commerce SOME small city
  4. This is a flawed argument: it incorrectly negates the “most” statement. However, this doesn’t match the stimulus. The original argument introduced a second factor, whereas this only has “farmer/not farmer”. (The lack of “some” also suggests this answer is wrong.)
  5. CORRECT. This matches. The author for some reason assumes that the only way to make significant art is to be a sculptor.
    Structure:
    *
    Sculptor SOME significant art
    * Musician –>
    sculptor
    * Conclusion: musician –> significant art

Previous Question
Table Of Contents




Free Logical Reasoning lesson

Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

I created LSATHacks, and scored a 177 on the LSAT.

Check out LSATHacks All Access

It's your one stop shop for LSAT prep: 1000s more explanations, and courses for both intro and advanced students. Lifetime access to everything on LSATHacks and anything I add. Plus a consult with me to get you started on the right track.
---------
Socials and Updates: If you have any questions, you can can check out my TikTok videos or email me.

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Free LSAT Email Course

My best LSAT tips, straight to your inbox


New! LSATHacks All Access: Get every course on LSATHacks + members only explanations

LSATHacks Pro

Get a higher score with LSATHacks

LSAT Course, LSAT Mastery seminars, and 3,000 extra explanations. All for only $760 $349, satisfaction guaranteed. Sign up here: https://lsathacks.com/all-access/

Testimonials

Your emails are tremendously helpful. - Matt

Thanks for the tips! They were very helpful, and even make you feel like you studied a bit. Great insight and would love more! - Haj

Dear Graeme: MUCH MORE PLEASE!! Your explanations are very clear, and you give equal importance to why answers are WRONG, as well as why THE ANSWER is right!! Very well done. Thank you for all your efforts - Tom

These have been awesome. More please!!! - Caillie

The course was immensely helpful and has eased my nerves a lot. - Lovlean

© Copyright 2023 LSAT Hacks. All Rights Reserved. | FAQ/Legal

Disclaimer: Use of this site requires official LSAT preptests; the explanations are of no use without the preptests. If you do not have the accompanying preptests, you can find them here: LSAT preptests
LSAT is copyright of LSAC. LSAC does not review or endorse specific test preparation materials or services and has not reviewed this site.
×
Item Added to your Cart!
There are no products
Continue Shopping