Logical Reasoning

PT126 · S1 · Q1 The editor of a magazine

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

The editor of a magazine has pointed out several errors of spelling and grammar committed on a recent TV program.

Conclusion

The editor can’t be trusted to judge spelling and grammar errors.

Evidence

There have been spelling and grammar errors in her own magazine.

Evaluation

So just because you committed a crime, you can’t judge whether that crime has occurred? If you’ve made a mistake, you can’t correctly judge when others are making a similar mistake? The fancy name for this Famous Flaw is Ad Hominem, which is basically when you try to invalidate the speaker of the argument, rather than the argument. The attack on the speaker is almost always about an ulterior motive or past behavior.

Goal

Look for an argument where the author says,

1.

The flawed reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following?

  1. Your newspaper cannot be trusted

    Bad Premise Match

    This isn’t about similar past behavior. “Can’t judge ethics if you misspelled someone’s name” is a different type of disconnect.

    3% picked this

  2. Correct

    Your news program cannot be

    Why this is right

    We can’t listen to you when it comes to saying that our hiring is unfair, because in the past you have done unfair hiring.

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

    95% picked this

  3. Your regulatory agency cannot condemn

    Bad Premise Match

    The matching premise would have been, “After all, in the past, this regulatory agency was guilty of unsafe products.”

    0% picked this

  4. Your coach cannot be trusted

    Bad Premise Match

    The matching premise would have been, “After all, in the past, this coach was guilty of bad swimming practices.”

    1% picked this

  5. Your teen magazine should not

    Bad Conclusion Match / Bad Premise Match

    The conclusion isn’t invalidating someone, it’s just suggesting that we not take a course of action. And its evidence doesn’t point out past bad behavior.

    0% 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