Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT130 S3 Q17 Explanation

A group of mountain climbers

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

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

A group of mountain climbers was studied to determine how they were affected by diminished oxygen in the air at high altitudes. As they climbed past 6,100 meters above sea level, the climbers slurred words, took longer to understand simple sentences, and demonstrated poor judgment. This combination of worsened brain controlling speech is distinct from that controlling other functions.

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
17.

The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it overlooks

Answer choices

  1. Correct82% picked this

    the climbers' performance in speech, comprehension, and reasoning was impaired because oxygen deprivation affected

    Why this is right

    This provides an alternative explanation for why all three performance areas would be affected at the same time.

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

  2. Irrelevant Comparison2% picked this

    the climbers' performance in speech, comprehension, and reasoning was better than average before

    How these climbers compare to others is not relevant. The relevant comparison is the change in performance during the climb.

  3. Irrelevant Comparison11% picked this

    the climbers showed different levels of impairment in their performance in speech,

    How these climbers compare each other is not relevant. The relevant comparison is the change in performance during the climb.

  4. Too Weak4% picked this

    some of the effects described were apparent just before the climbers

    This answer doesn't separate the onset of the affected speech, comprehension, and reasoning.

  5. Irrelevant Comparison2% picked this

    many of the climbers had engaged in special training before the climb because they wanted to improve the efficiency with

    How the climbers performed relative to what their performance would have been without special training is not relevant to the argument. The relevant comparison is the change in performance during the climb.

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