LSAT 158 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q1

LR Question 1 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: In the previous two years, significantly more rain has…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: More rain will probably fall in September than July in Browning.

REASONING: More rain has fallen in September than July for the past two years in Browning.

ANALYSIS: This argument is pretty simple: it happened before, so it will probably happen again. It bases this on only the past two years, which is not a lot. We don’t know if the last two years happened to have exceptionally rainy Septembers or dry Julys. The correct answer will probably attack this weakness.

___________

1. This argument doesn’t do this.
    
   Example of flaw: Everyone goes to Joe’s Market because it is the most popular store.
2. CORRECT. See analysis above. 2 years is not a lot of time to base this argument on.
3. The argument doesn’t emphasize this possibility at all. Even if the last 2 years were especially rainy, the argument is comparing times within those years. A year being more rainy than usual wouldn’t typically change which months are rainiest.
4. The argument doesn’t do this.
    
   Example of flaw: When Taylor Swift and Drake go on tour, they often perform in the same cities. They must be working together to choose which cities to visit.
5. There is no evidence that the argument does this.
    
   Example of flaw: A guy at the store told me it always rains on Tuesdays. So it will probably rain tomorrow, because today is Monday.

Recap: The question begins with “In the previous two years, significantly more rain has”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Flaw questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.