Logical Reasoning

PT114 · S2 · Q1 Journalist: One reason many people

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

Start practicing free

Journalist: One reason many people believe in extrasensory perception (ESP) is that they have heard of controlled experiments in which ESP is purportedly demonstrated.

Conclusion

ESP is a myth and the public is deluded by these experiments in which ESP is purportedly demonstrated.

Evidence (for)

A prominent researcher has admitted to falsifying data on psychic phenomena in order to obtain additional grants.

Evaluate

The move from premise to conclusion here is so drastic we might get whiplash.

Because one researcher working vaguely in the ESP space has admitted to falsifying data to obtain grants, this author is saying we can therefore conclude that the whole supposed phenomenon of ESP is a myth. Every controlled experiment that has purported to demonstrate its existence has just been a lie that is deluding the public.

This argument would be analogous to saying,

Goal

Let's find an answer saying that one researcher's dishonest behavior doesn't show that ESP is a myth. We don't even know for sure if this researcher's dishonest behavior related directly to demonstrating ESP's existence. But no matter what it related to, it's not grounds for rejecting ESP.

1.

The reasoning in the journalist's argument is flawed because this argument

  1. uses an irrelevant personal attack

    Out of Scope: personal attack

    There aren't any personal attacks in this paragraph. The author factually states that a prominent researcher has admitted to falsifying data.

    5% picked this

  2. infers that something must be

    Bad Evidence Match

    This answer has the structure, infers X from the fact that Y so we need to verify that X matches the conclusion (or an assumption made en route to the conclusion) and that Y matches the evidence. Did the author conclude/assume that something must be a myth? Yes, definitely. The conclusion says "ESP is a myth". Did the evidence say, "The general public believes in ESP?" Not quite. It mentions as a background fact that "many people" believe in ESP, but "many people ≠ the general public". Also, this isn't the author's evidence. This isn't the reason she's calling ESP a myth. Her support (indicated by FABS = for, after all, because, since) is the final claim about an "ESP researcher" admitting to falsifying data.

    2% picked this

  3. presupposes that, in general, only

    Not Assumed / Too Strong: only

    Since this answer begins with takes for granted / presumes / presupposes, we want to ask ourselves whether the author really made such an assumption. This is a very strong idea, so it's unlikely to correctly describe an assumption. Since it could be written as a conditional, we can ask ourselves whether the author ever made this reasoning move: If it's not evidence → then it can't from an experiment support beliefs That doesn't sound like the premise to conclusion move at all, which was more like this: If a researcher in field X → then field X is falsifying data is a myth

    3% picked this

  4. implies that all scientists who

    Too Strong: all

    Does this argument ever imply that 100% of scientists who depend on grants are unreliable? Definitely not. The author is just saying that this researcher, who depends on grants, is unreliable, and then our author assumes that this researcher's subject of inquiry (ESP / psychic phenomena) is therefore not a legitimate phenomenon.

    2% picked this

  5. Correct

    overgeneralizes from the example of

    Why this is right

    This captures the fact that the evidence is super weak support. The author goes from, "there's this one researcher in the ESP space who falsified data. Thus, ESP is a myth and anyone attempting to show it exists is deluding the public." That is way too drastic a conclusion to infer from one data point of a deceptive researcher. The verb "overgeneralizes" is synonymous with the Famous Flaw called Sampling, in which the author's argument relies on sample data that is either too small, unrepresentative, self-selecting, biased, or troubling in some other way.

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

    88% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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