Logical Reasoning

PT137 · S2 · Q13 Although most builders do not

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

Although most builders do not consider the experimental building material papercrete to be a promising material for large-scale construction, those who regularly work with it, primarily on small-scale projects, think otherwise.

Conclusion

Papercrete is probably a great option for large-scale construction.

Evidence

Even though most builders would disagree, builders who regularly work with papercrete (mostly on small-scale stuff) think it is a good option, and people who regularly use papercrete are familiar with its properties.

Evaluate

This is a He Said / She Said type argument, in that the author presents two opposing points of view, which sets up a "Well -- who should we trust?" type feeling.

Sometimes author's 'pick a winner' without justifying their choice. Here, the author is like,

This argument could potentially be described as a self-selecting sample. The papercrete enthusiasts primarily use it on small-scale stuff, but that implicitly means they sometimes use it on large-scale stuff. If they use it on large-scale stuff sometimes, then by definition they think it's promising for large-scale stuff. So why should the author trust their biased assessment over that of most builders?

Goal

Look for an answer that helps us stick up for "most builders" side of the He Said / She Said battle, or make the author's reason for choosing the Enthusiast side of the battle seem like a poor justification for picking.

13.

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

  1. confuses what is promising for

    Bad Premise Match

    If a Flaw answer has the syntax of "confuses X with Y", it's trying to express that the author went from talking about This to talking about That. The conclusion is definitely talking about what is promising for large-scale, but so is the Evidence. It says that builders who regularly work with papercrete think that it is promising for large-scale construction. The phrase "think otherwise" is a callback to the very first claim (most builders think P isn't promising for large-scale). The little parenthetical aside about them using papercrete primarily on small-scale stuff isn't a part of the argument; it's just some filler. This answer accuses the argument of being, "Because papercrete is promising on small-scale, it would likely be promising on large scale." But the argument actually goes, "Because the people who regularly work with papercrete believe it would be promising on large-scale, it would likely be promising on large-scale."

    42% picked this

  2. presumes that what the majority

    Opposite

    The author, without a great reason, is actually going against what the majority of builders thinks is promising. Most builders think papercrete isn't promising for large-scale, and the author is not presuming they're correct; he's concluding the opposite.

    3% picked this

  3. equivocates between two different meanings

    Wrong Flaw

    This describes the famous Equivocation flaw, but the word "promising" is being used consistently throughout.

    1% picked this

  4. does not consider the views

    Opposite

    The author is blindly trusting the views of the builders who have the most experience working with papercrete! That's the entire crux of his argument: because the ones who have the most experience with papercrete think it's promising for large scale, I conclude it is promising for large-scale.

    1% picked this

  5. Correct

    fails to consider that most

    Why this is right

    The author presents a He Said / She Said and says, I'm going with these builders, the ones in the minority, who think that papercrete is promising for large-scale. After all, they are familiar with its properties! In order for that reason to justify the author's pick, that has to be something that's different between the two camps. This answer is making the objection that "being familiar with its properties" might not be a difference between the two groups, thus, it doesn't constitute a good reason (or really any reason) to believe one group over the other. If we said "Most dentists don't think the X-drill is good for root canals, but those who regularly use the X-drill think it's good for root canals. So it must be.", then someone could object by saying what if those dentists who don't use the X-drill did their homework, tried it out, and judged it to be inferior to other options? This answer is saying, "What if most builders know what they're talkin' about, tried out this papercrete, read up on it, and decided that its chemical and molecular structure just aren't great for large-scale." The author can't defend his camp by saying, "but MY guys are familiar with its properties", because we'll say "yeah but so are ALL builders".

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

    53% 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