Logical Reasoning

PT137 · S3 · Q6 Of the many test pilots

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

Of the many test pilots who have flown the new plane, none has found it difficult to operate.

Conclusion

The test pilot flying the plane tomorrow probably won't find it difficult to operate the plane.

Evidence

The many test pilots who have flown this plane before didn't find it difficult to operate.

Evaluate

This argument has a pretty straightforward structure of, .

If it was true in the past, it'll probably be true in the future.

Is this airtight logic? No. There are sampling concerns -- what if the pilot testing tomorrow is meaningfully different from all the pilots who have tested before? However, the author isn't being certain about her conclusion. She's just saying it's "likely" that things will go down the way they've always gone down before. So that's a pretty reasonable conclusion.

Goal

Find an argument that says,

6.

The reasoning in which one of the following arguments is most similar to the reasoning in the argument above?

  1. All of the many book

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The original argument said "since the previous pilots were X, the pilot tomorrow will be X". But this is saying "since the previous reviewers were X, the average reader will be X." That introduces a change in category that the original argument didn't have. It would be a much less reasonable argument to say "since all the pilots had no difficulty, the average airplane passenger who is testing the plane tomorrow probably won't have difficulty".

    1% picked this

  2. Many of the book reviewers

    Bad Premise / Conclusion Match

    The original premise said that ALL the previous pilots had no difficulty. This premise is saying MANY of the reviewers found it entertaining ("many" can be like 10%). This completely changes the logical force of the evidence, so we could get rid of it without continuing to read. But the conclusion is also off, shifting from "reviewers" to "most people" and concluding that the OPPOSITE of past situations will be true (going from "entertaining" to "boring")

    4% picked this

  3. Neither of the two reviewers

    Weak Premise Match

    This has less compelling evidence than the original. Here, two previous reviewers had experience X. In the original argument, all of the many pilots to tried the plane had experience X. 2 < Many. The other glitch is that this premise is actually a subset of reviewers. It's "reviewers who enjoyed the new novel". The conclusion doesn't replicate that qualifier, so we have a category switch going from "reviewers who enjoyed it" in PREMISE to "reviewer" in CONCLUSION.

    6% picked this

  4. Correct

    Many reviewers have read Kip

    Why this is right

    Every previous reviewer had experience X (didn't enjoy it). So, this new reviewer will probably have experience X.

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

    84% picked this

  5. None of the reviewers who

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The conclusion switches categories from "reviewers" to "general public". The original argument stayed in the same category: "because it was true of every pilot before, it'll probably be true of the next pilot".

    5% 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