Logical Reasoning

PT133 · S3 · Q2 Artist: Almost everyone in this country

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

Artist: Almost everyone in this country really wants to be an artist even though they may have to work other jobs to pay the rent.

Conclusion

Almost everyone in this country really wants to be an artist.

Evidence (after all)

Just about everyone I know hopes to one day make a living as a painter, musician, or poet.

Evaluate

The conclusion and evidence are making very similar claims, but about two different groups.

EVID: almost everyone I know wants to be an artist, even if they're working a day job.

CONC: almost everyone in the country wants to be an artist, even if they're working a day job.

When we see that copycat language repeating on Flaw questions, it's often a Sampling flaw or Part vs. Whole flaw.

In this case, the author is using a sample of "almost everyone I know" to extrapolate a true statement about "almost everyone in the country". To make such a generalization, the author needs to assume that the sample of people she knows is representative of people in the country.

We would already be concerned about the small sample size of "everyone I know", but we can also worry that this sample is potentially unrepresentative given that artists tend to live and associate with other artists.

Artists tend to know other artists — friends, collaborators, people in the same scene. They're all living in lofts together and still on their parents' phone plans / health plans.

(I say this with love. I was an artist living in my van before I became an LSAT teacher.)

Goal

Find an answer that calls out the famous Sampling flaw.

2.

The reasoning in the artist's argument is flawed in that the argument

  1. contains a premise that presupposes

    Circular Reasoning

    This says one of the premises secretly assumes the conclusion. That's circular reasoning, and it's not what's happening here. The premise (about people the artist knows) is genuinely independent of the conclusion (about everyone in the country). Too independent, in fact. :) Meaning, you can definitely accept the premise without having to also believe the conclusion.

    2% picked this

  2. presumes that what is true

    Part vs. Whole

    Did the evidence talk about "what is true of each person in a country"? No, the evidence talked about "what is true of almost everyone the artist knows". This describes a part-vs.-whole flaw — assuming what's true of each individual is true of the group as a whole. But the conclusion here is about almost every person in the country (which is just the same individual-level claim, scaled up), not about a group-level property like "the country, as a whole, is artistic." There's no shift from individual to collective property.

    3% picked this

  3. defends a view solely on

    Inappropriate Appeals

    The argument is not "this view is widely held, therefore it's true." The premise doesn't talk about a widely held view. It says that almost everyone the author knows is a wannabe artist. Treating opinion as though it's fact is one form of the famous Inappropriate Appeals flaw.

    1% picked this

  4. Correct

    bases its conclusion on a

    Why this is right

    The artist's sample, "everyone I know", is the people in the artist's social circle. It is both very small in size and also likely to be skewed. Artists tend to have other aspiring artists in their circles, so this sample is unlikely to look anything like the country's general population.

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

    90% picked this

  5. fails to make a needed

    Equivocation

    In both the premise and the conclusion the author DOES maintain the distinction between wanting to be a professional artist and temporarily working a non-art job as you pursue that goal.

    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