Logical Reasoning

PT119 · S3 · Q7 Numerous books describe the rules

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

Numerous books describe the rules of etiquette.

Conclusion (so)

It is absurd to label any one set of behaviors as correct and others as incorrect.

Evidence

Some books describing the rules of etiquette codify some behaviors as polite (correct) and other behaviors as rude (correct).

This suggests that there is one single, objective standard of politeness, but standards of politeness vary from culture to culture.

Evaluate

We might actually consider this argument having three conclusions, "this suggests / clearly / so". When arguments have multiple conclusions, we want to think about objections we could make at each level of the argument.

The final move to the conclusion is saying, .

That seems flawed. We can't say, After all, maybe one of them was obviously way better than all the others.

Similarly, we need to allow for the possibility that even though different cultures have different standards, one set of standards just happens to be better than all the others.

The author made a move from saying, .

Do they suggest that? We could push back here and say,

Goal

Look for an answer defending the idea that you can codify a set of behaviors without it suggesting that the set you're describing is the one, correct set.

Or look for an answer saying that,

We might also see an answer pointing out the language drift from "polite" to "correct" and from "rude" to "incorrect".

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

reaches a conclusion about how
Bad Conclusion Match
Is the conclusion about how people actually behave? No, the entire argument is only about rules of how people should behave (correct / incorrect). The conclusion is saying it's absurd for writers of etiquette books to believe a certain idea.
4% picked this
bases a generalization about all
Bad Conclusion Match Not Sampling
If an answer says the argument bases X on Y, then X should match a conclusion and Y should match part of the evidence. Was the conclusion a generalization about all books of etiquette? No, the last claim is saying anything that is true about 100% of etiquette books. It's just saying that "idea X is absurd". Was the evidence talking about the actions of a few authors? Sure, kind of. "Numerous books describe ___ " is referring to actions of authors. But that first claim is more like background than evidence. This answer is teasing the famous Sampling flaw, in which the author says, "since this thing was true for these few authors of etiquette books, it must be true about all books of etiquette".
6% picked this
fails to justify its presumption
Not Assumed
The author didn't make any assumptions about what sort of causal influence the rules of etiquette have on actual behavior. Nothing in the paragraph discusses actual behavior. It's only an argument about whether or not it's absurd to codify etiquette and pass it off as though this is "the correct" standard by which people should live.
3% picked this
Correct
overlooks the possibility that authors
Why this is right
Hey, Irish Manners, it was you?! This answer matches one of the objections we were making in our evaluation, which was "even though these books codify standards of behavior, that doesn't suggest to the reader that there is a single, objective standard of politeness". After all, maybe the author makes clear that he/she is only speaking for one particular culture. So the books are saying, "This is what counts as correct / incorrect within Culture X". How were we able to anticipate this kind of answer? We asked our brain how it would resist each of the author's moves. "Hey, brain -- how can we accept that books on etiquette codify behaviors as polite or rude, but argue that this doesn't suggest there is a single, objective standard of politeness?" Even if we were focused on the move to the main conclusion and asked, "Hey, brain -- how can we accept that cultures vary a ton in terms of their standards of politeness, but still argue that it's not absurd to label a set of behaviors 'correct'?" This answer would whisper the solution to us --- it's not absurd to label one set of behaviors 'correct' if you're only labeling them 'correct' for one given culture!
Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
84% picked this
attempts to lend itself credence
Out of Scope: lend itself credence
The author was only calling the final claim "absurd" because the author believed it would be genuinely silly to say, "Of all these arbitrary cultural value systems, system X is the correct one." It would be like deciding on the "one true religion". The author was not using the word 'absurd' to elevate his own credibility.
3% 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