LSAT 150 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q17

LR Question 17 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Advocate: A study of people who had recently recovered from colds…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Cold medicine makes your cold last longer.

REASONING: People who took cold medicine had worse cold symptoms.

ANALYSIS: The advocates makes a really stupid causation/correlation flaw. Whenever there you see a correlation on the LSAT, you should remember that there are four possibilities:

1. Cold medicine causes worse colds
2. Worse colds make people take cold medicine.
3. Some third factor both makes people sick and makes them take cold medicine.
4. It’s a coincidence.

In this case, the second possibility should be an obvious possible explanation, but the advocate ignores it.

___________

1. This didn’t happen. This is the flaw of taking belief as fact.
    
   Example of flaw: Most people believe cold medicine is the work of the devil. So, it is the work of the devil.
2. This didn’t happen. Maybe you thought the argument treated the “advocate” as an expert? But, they weren’t relying on expert knowledge.
    
   Example of flaw: This person says he is a doctor and asks for $8000 so he can give me vitamin pills. I better do it.
3. This is a different flaw. (Moving from a generalization to an individual)
    
   Example of flaw: People are usually unimportant politically. So, this senator must be unimportant politically.
4. This is a sufficient/necessary flaw. This didn’t happen.
    
   Example of flaw: You need to breathe to be an olympic medal winner. I can breathe, so I’ll be sure to win a medal!
5. CORRECT. This matches. The advocate ignores the possibility that having a bad cold is what causes people to take the cold medicine.

Recap: The question begins with “Advocate: A study of people who had recently recovered from colds”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Flaw questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.