Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT13 S2 Q26 Explanation

If Blankenship Enterprises has to

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

TopicsFlaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

If Blankenship Enterprises has to switch suppliers in the middle of a large production run, the company will not show a profit for the year. Therefore, if Blankenship Enterprises in fact turns out to show no profit for the year, it will also turn to switch suppliers during a large production run.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Your task

Describe the reasoning error the argument actually commits.

Common trap

Answers that name a real logical flaw the argument doesn't actually make.

Winning move

Articulate the gap in the reasoning yourself, then match it to the choice that describes that gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
26.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of

Answer choices

  1. Trap13% picked this

    The argument is a circular argument made up of an opening claim followed by a conclusion that

  2. Correct80% picked this

    The argument fails to establish that a condition under which a phenomenon is said to occur is the only condition

    Why this is right

    Answer B is correct.

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

  3. Trap1% picked this

    The argument involves an equivocation, in that the word “profit” is allowed to shift its meaning during the

  4. Trap3% picked this

    The argument erroneously uses an exceptional, isolated case to support a

  5. Trap4% picked this

    The argument explains one event as being caused by another event, even though both events must actually have been caused

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