Logical Reasoning

PT18 · S4 · Q25 George: A well-known educator claims

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

George: A well-known educator claims that children who are read to when they are very young are more likely to enjoy reading when they grow up than are children who were not read to.

Conclusion

This claim is clearly false. (Children who are read to when they are very young are not more likely to enjoy reading when they grow up)

Evidence

My cousin is an example of someone who was read to when young but doesn't enjoy reading as a grown up.

I am an example of someone who wasn't read to when young but I do enjoy reading as a grown up.

Evaluate

It looks like George doesn't know the difference between "more likely to enjoy reading" and "is certain to enjoy reading".

He's acting like presenting individual data points that are exception to a general trend proves that a general trend is wrong.

If a scientist tells us that , we're not proving her wrong by saying .

Goal

Look for an answer saying that George is acting like in order for it to be true that "X makes Y more likely", that whenever X is true Y is true, and whenever X is false, Y is false.

25.

Which one of the following describes a flaw in George’s reasoning?

  1. He treats his own experience

    Out of Scope: experiences of others

    George doesn't act like his experiences carry more weight than those of other people. He's just acting like his and his cousin's experiences are enough to falsify a general claim. I can see people talking themselves into this answer by thinking, "Doesn't George realize that he and his cousin are just atypical data points, that are outweighed by a majority of data points that do fit the educator's general claim?" If so, does that mean that he's treating his experience as having more weight than the experiences of other people? That's working too hard to make this answer work. We don't have to interpret George's confusion as, "he thinks his experiences count for more", when we could just think, "George is not too sharp, and doesn't know the difference between someone saying that X makes Y more likely and someone saying X guarantees that Y will always be true."

    38% picked this

  2. He does not distinguish between

    Not Our Objection

    If we wanted to dig into the educator's claim, we might want to get more specific about what quantity or quality of book-reading will be more likely to make a difference. But we're just trying to comment on George's flaw, which was as simple as thinking that two counterexamples to a general trend proves that the general trend is not happening.

    1% picked this

  3. He overlooks the well-known fact

    Not An Objection

    We aren't going to hurt George's argument by saying that "some reading is more relaxing than other reading". We are going to hurt his argument by saying, "So what if you and your cousin are atypical examples? For the most part, being read to as a kid makes one more likely to enjoy reading as an adult."

    1% picked this

  4. He fails to establish that

    Out of Scope: most educators

    We're certainly not complaining that "George, your argument should have established that more than 50% of educators hold the same view as the person you're disagreeing with." If I'm disagreeing with someone who is a NY Yankees fan, I don't have to establish that the thing they said (that I'm objecting to) is an opinion held by 51% or more of Yankees fans.

    2% picked this

  5. Correct

    He attempts to refute a

    Why this is right

    Is he attempting to refute a general claim? Yes. "This claim [ kids who are read to as young children are more likely to enjoy reading when they grow up ] is clearly false." Is his evidence a reference to nonconforming cases? Yes, he and his cousin don't fit that general trend, since the one who was read to doesn't enjoy reading and the one who wasn't read to does enjoy reading. Is the educator's claim consistent with (not contradicted by) these nonconforming cases? Yes. The educator's claim was just "X makes it more likely that Y". That isn't any sort of guarantee, so it definitely tolerates exceptions.

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

    59% 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