Logical Reasoning

PT10 · S1 · Q21 The Japanese haiku is defined as

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

The Japanese haiku is defined as a poem of three lines with five syllables in the first line, seven syllables in the second line, and five syllables in the third line.

Conclusion (This demonstrates that)

English poets have little respect for foreign traditions, even those from which some of their own poetry derives.

Evidence

English poets tend to disregard the definition of Haiku and tend to apply that label to any three-line English poem with a “haiku feel.”

Evaluate

We've got some new ideas in the conclusion which indicates the argument rests on some assumptions. What ideas in the evidence do the conclusion ideas call back to? "Little respect for foreign traditions" seems to be calling back to our misapplication of the haiku label. So, it looks like this argument assumes that the misapplication of the haiku label indicates a lack of respect for foreign traditions. seems to be calling back to haiku. So, this argument also seems to assume that haiku is a foreign tradition from which some English poetry is derived.

Since this is a Flaw question, we also want to be looking for Famous Flaws. This argument draws a broad general conclusion from a single instance. When you've got a sample of 1, that's probably too small and possibly unrepresentative.

Goal

Look for an answer that calls out the Sampling Flaw, describes an assumption the argument makes, or attacks those assumptions by raising objections. Beware answers that accuse the argument of doing things it isn't guilty of. Make sure every answer you consider is a good description of what took place in the stimulus.

21.

The reasoning is flawed because it

  1. confuses matters of objective fact

    Bad Description

    Do we have matters of objective fact in this argument? Sure: we've got the definition of haiku. And do we have matters of subjective feeling? Yep: English poets call anything that feels like a Haiku a Haiku, regardless of syllable count. So, on first read, this sounds pretty good. The problem is the idea of confusing one thing for another. The English poets may be guilty of confusing feelings for facts when they misapply the Haiku label: they are treating their feelings as though they are facts. But the argument itself isn't guilty of this. Now, if you're thinking "hey, isn't the conclusion kind of about feelings and the evidence about facts?" you're not wrong. This is a totally reasonable answer to keep on the first pass. But ultimately, it's a weaker match than another answer because we can't say for sure that a judgement about a lack of respect is a matter of subjective feeling, and we can't say for sure that this argument got confused about what's feeling and what's fact.

    14% picked this

  2. Correct

    draws a conclusion that is

    Why this is right

    Is our conclusion broader than our evidence? Definitely. The conclusion is about foreign traditions based on one measly example: the misapplication of the Haiku label.

    Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    71% picked this

  3. relies on stereotypes instead of

    Bad Evidence Match: stereotypes

    This argument didn't rely on any stereotypes to make its case. This answer also subtly describes a flavor of Inappropriate Appeal: Appeal to Emotion.

    3% picked this

  4. overlooks the possibility that the

    Opposite

    "Overlooks the possibility" is objection language, so when we see that in an answer, we ask ourselves two questions: 1) Is this an accurate description? Did the argument actually overlook that possibility? 2) Is this a good objection? Does that possibility actually weaken the argument? So, does this argument overlook the possibility that the case it cites is not unique? No, it does the opposite! It assumes that the case it cites is not unique. It assumes that it is a representative sample. If the answer to question 1 is "no," the answer is wrong. No need to ask question 2.

    1% picked this

  5. fails to acknowledge that ignoring

    Bad Description

    "Fails to acknowledge" is objection language, so we need to ask ourselves: 1) is this an accurate description? 2) is that a good objection? So, did the argument actually fail to acknowledge that ignoring something implies a negative judgment? No, if anything, it kind of implies it. The English poets ignored the definition of Haiku, and we conclude that they lack respect, which is a flavor of negative judgment. Since the answer to question 1 is "no," the answer is wrong and we don't need to ask question 2.

    12% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free