Logical Reasoning

PT150 · S2 · Q1 Philosopher: I have been told

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

Philosopher: I have been told that most university students today have no interest in philosophical issues, but I know from my own experience that this isn’t true.

Conclusion

This isn't true.

rephrase: Most university students do have interest in philosophical issues.

Evidence

I often go to university campuses to give talks, and the students at my talks have a deep interest in philosophical issues.

Evaluate

Given that ... the students at this philosopher's talks have a deep interest in philosophical issues,

How could we argue that ... most university students don't have interest in philosophical issues?

We could probably say that the author's sample of student opinion is totally biased!

Can you imagine if we said,

Well, obviously, if you go to the conservative club meeting, they'll hate liberals.

Just like if you poll people at a philosophy talk, they'll say they like philosophy. If you poll people at a BBQ ribs restaurant, you won't find too many vegetarians.

Whenever an argument relies on a sample, we worry about whether it's Too Small / Unrepresentative, Biased, or Self-Selecting / Bad Data for some other reason (like the respondents were pressured out of giving honest answers).

Goal

Let's look for an answer talking about the the Famous Sampling flaw. The philosopher seems to be failing to consider that even though the students at this philosophy talks are interested in philosophy, those students might not be representative of most university students. They might just be the weirdos who like philosophy enough to go attend a talk in their spare time.

1.

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

  1. uses the term "interest" in

    Not Equivocation

    This answer refers to another one of the 10 Famous Flaws, Equivocation, in which the argument uses the same term/concept multiple times but in completely different ways. For example, the word "interest" could mean how much curiosity someone feels, or it could mean the amount of money that an investment earns. But this argument is consistently using "interest" to mean the amount of enthusiasm / curiosity that someone has for a subject.

    1% picked this

  2. Correct

    treats a group as representative

    Why this is right

    This describes the Famous Flaw, Sampling. The evidence is about "students who attend philosophical talks". They have interest in philosophical issues. On this basis, the author concludes that a broader group, "most university students" share the same trait. So the first half of the answer is definitely descriptively accurate: the author is treating the group of students attending the talks as though they are representative of the larger group of most university students. Is there reason to believe that the group of students attending philosophy talks is unrepresentative of university students in general? Yes! It's a self-selecting sample. You're only at a philosophy talk if you've been forced to come or chose to come because you're interested. It would be like trying to figure out what percentage of a given city is religious by checking what percentage of the people at a church are religious. That's a self-selecting sample.

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

    96% picked this

  3. appeals to the popularity of

    Bad Conclusion/Evidence Match

    Since this says that the author appeals to X as evidence of Y, we know that X should match the evidence and Y should match the conclusion. Is the conclusion talking about the "worth" of the field of philosophy? Nope. It's just saying that "Most college students have an interest in the field". That doesn't claim in any way that the field is worthwhile. That's enough reason to ditch this answer. Is the evidence talking about how popular philosophy is? Not really. It's talking about the interest level of students who attend talks, which we could painfully stretch to be a claim about "how popular the field of philosophy is", but that's is way too big a stretch.

    0% picked this

  4. takes for granted that just

    Bad Conclusion/Evidence Match

    Since this says that the author assumes that because of X, it must be Y, we know that X should match the evidence and Y should match the conclusion. Is the conclusion saying that "interest in philosophy is increasing"? Nope. It's just saying that "Most college students have an interest in the field". That doesn't claim in any way that interest in the field is increasing, or changing at all. That's enough reason to ditch this answer. Is the evidence saying "there's no evidence that interest in philosophy is decreasing"? Nope. It's talking about the interest level of students who attend talks. It's not saying anything about interest not-decreasing. So this would also be enough of a reason to ditch this answer.

    1% picked this

  5. takes for granted that it

    Bad Conclusion/Evidence Match

    Since this says that the author assumes that it is Y just because of X, we know that X should match the evidence and Y should match the conclusion. Is the conclusion saying that "it is good that university students have an interest in philosophy"? Nope. It's just saying that "Most college students have an interest in the field". That doesn't claim in any way whether it's good or bad. That's enough reason to ditch this answer. The evidence part of this also doesn't match. The argument's evidence was about the interest level of students who attend the author's philosophy talks. This answer claims the evidence said that "someone's self-interest is being served by an argument", which doesn't bear any resemblance to the premise.

    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