Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT131 S2 Q6 Explanation

Although Jaaks is a respected historian

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

Although Jaaks is a respected historian, her negative review of Yancey's new book on the history of coastal fisheries in the region rests on a mistake. Jaaks's review argues that the book inaccurately portrays the lives of fishery workers. However, Yancey used the same research methods in this book popular. This book is also very popular in local bookstores.

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
6.

The reasoning above is flawed in

Answer choices

  1. Bad Evidence Match0% picked this

    relies on the word of a scholar who is unqualified in the

    The author isn't relying on the word of any scholar. The author is attacking the evaluation of a qualified scholar, Jaaks. The author is defending the accuracy of Yancey's book (Yancey is a scholar), but the author relies on premises about research methods and popularity, not on any premise that offers a scholar's testimony.

  2. Bad Premise Match4% picked this

    attacks the person making the claim at issue rather than addressing

    The author actually compliments Jaaks as being a respected historian. Furthermore, the author's premises are about Yancey's methods and the popularity of Yancey's books. No premise takes a shot at Jaaks. This answer describes the Famous Flaw of Ad Hominem.

  3. Correct89% picked this

    takes for granted that the popularity of a book is evidence

    Why this is right

    Yes, the author assumed that the popularity of Yancey's book was somehow relevant to an assessment of the book's accuracy. If we negated this assumption and said, "Popularity is no evidence of accuracy", that would definitely weaken the author's argument.

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

  4. Bad Conclusion / Premise Match1% picked this

    bases a general conclusion on a sample that is likely to

    Is the conclusion a general claim? No, it's a specific claim about Yancey's book. That's enough to eliminate, but there also isn't any sample in the evidence. There's a comparison to Yancey's other books (so the author is assuming some similarities) but no sample. This answer choice describes the Famous Flaw of Sampling.

  5. Too Strong; "the only methods"5% picked this

    presumes, without providing justification, that the methods used by Yancey are the only methods that

    The author assumes that Yancey's methods are accurate, but she doesn't need to assume that Yancey's methods are the the only accurate methods.

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