Logical Reasoning

PT136 · S2 · Q13 Brooks: I'm unhappy in my job

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

Brooks: I'm unhappy in my job, but I don't know whether I can accept the risks involved in quitting my job.

Conclusion

You might as well just quit your job.

Evidence

The only risk in quitting a job is that of not finding another job. And if you don't find another job, you'll be unhappy. But you already are unhappy.

Evaluation

Given that Brooks is already unhappy in his job, and the only risk in quitting is not being able to find a new job (which would make him unhappy), how could we argue that Brooks should not quit his job?

Well, Brooks only said he's unhappy in his job. If he quit and then were unemployed because he couldn't find a job, he would be unhappy with having no job. Maybe those are two different types of unhappiness and the latter is worse than the former.

Additionally, we were given a conditional that says , and then Morgenstern thought that was a moot point since Brooks is already happy.

But maybe there are other downsides as well to not finding a new job. Morgenstern didn't establish that being unhappy is the only result of not finding a job. Maybe other results would include needing to sell your car, losing your partner, and having to move back in with your parents.

Even if we assumed unhappiness is equivalent in this world vs. world where he quits, there might be other ramifications of quitting that make that world worse than this world.

Goal

Find an answer pointing out a meaningful difference between his current unhappiness and the unhappiness he'd get from not being able to find a job, or find an answer discussing other possible negative ramifications of quitting his job.

13.

Morgenstern's argument is flawed in that it

  1. Correct

    fails to take into account

    Why this is right

    How is it an objection to point out that unhappiness can vary intensity or significance? We can say, "Hey, Morganstern, sure he's already unhappy, but he would be way more unhappy if he were jobless." This is a Relative vs. Absolute flaw. Morganstern is thinking about unhappiness in absolute yes/no terms, while Brooks could easily counter that "yes, I'd be unhappy either way, but I'd be way more unhappy if I were jobless."

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

    68% picked this

  2. relies on an assumption that

    Not "Circular Reasoning"

    When an answer choice says that the argument concluded a restatement of a premise, or that the author "assumed the truth of the conclusion", it's referring to a Circular Argument. These answers are almost always wrong. If there are any unique premises that don't sound like a restatement of the conclusion, we wouldn't call it circular. The author includes a premise that is a conditional rule "the only thing you're risking is not being able to find another job". The fact that this idea is not a restatement of the conclusion, "You might as well quit", shows that this is not a circular argument.

    12% picked this

  3. mischaracterizes what Brooks says

    Doesn't Mischaracterize

    Morganstern characterizes Brooks as being already unhappy in his current position, but that is a proper characterization of what Brooks said.

    7% picked this

  4. conflates two different types of

    Not About Risk

    The author does conflate two different types of "unhappiness" (being unhappy in your job and being unhappy because you can't find a job), but there aren't two different senses of "risk" happening. It is only used once and it's used in the sense of "potential downside to an action".

    11% picked this

  5. reaches a generalization on the

    Not "Sampling"

    The conclusion is not a generalization; it's a specific claim about Brooks quitting his job. This answer choice describes the famous flaw Sampling.

    1% 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