In the Logical Reasoning section of the Law School Admission Test (LSAT), flaw questions challenge test-takers to identify the errors, gaps, or weaknesses in the given argument. Flaw questions assess a candidate’s ability to critically analyze the reasoning presented and uncover the logical flaws that undermine the argument’s strength. By mastering this question type, test-takers can demonstrate their ability to think critically and evaluate the soundness of an argument on the LSAT. Let’s explore an overview of flaw questions, along with examples and a step-by-step guide on how to solve them effectively.
Flaw Questions in the LSAT’s Logical Reasoning Section
Flaw questions present an argument in the form of a short passage. The passage contains a conclusion supported by premises or evidence. Test-takers must identify the answer choice that points out the logical flaws, weaknesses, or assumptions that render the argument unsound or invalid. In essence, the correct answer must reveal the gaps or errors in the reasoning used to reach the conclusion.
Example:
Argument: “The new public transportation system has led to an increase in ridership over the past year. Therefore, it proves that the system has successfully reduced traffic congestion in the city.”
Question: Which of the following most accurately identifies the flaw in the argument above?
A) The increase in ridership may be due to reduced gasoline prices, not the new transportation system.
B) Traffic congestion is a common problem in most major cities, not just this particular one.
C) The data collected to measure ridership may be unreliable or inaccurate.
D) The ridership increase may not be sustainable in the long term.
E) The transportation system’s effectiveness should be measured by comparing traffic congestion data before and after its implementation.
Solving Flaw Questions in the LSAT’s Logical Reasoning Section:
Step 1: Identify the Conclusion and Premises Read the argument carefully and determine the conclusion and the premises or evidence that support it. Understanding the structure of the argument is crucial to pinpointing the logical flaws.
In the example, the conclusion is “The system has successfully reduced traffic congestion in the city,” and the premises are the increase in ridership over the past year.
Step 2: Anticipate the Answer Before looking at the answer choices, try to anticipate the type of flaw or logical error present in the argument based on the conclusion and premises.
In this case, potential flaws could include alternative explanations for the increase in ridership or the failure to consider other factors that might impact traffic congestion.
Step 3: Evaluate the Answer Choices Carefully read each answer choice and assess its impact on the argument. Cross out choices that do not directly expose the logical flaw.
A) The increase in ridership may be due to reduced gasoline prices, not the new transportation system.
- This points to an alternative explanation for the increase in ridership, exposing a possible flaw in the argument.
B) Traffic congestion is a common problem in most major cities, not just this particular one.
- While this may be true, it does not directly address the argument’s logical flaw.
C) The data collected to measure ridership may be unreliable or inaccurate.
- While data accuracy is important, this does not directly affect the reasoning behind the conclusion.
D) The ridership increase may not be sustainable in the long term.
- This does not directly expose a logical flaw in the argument.
E) The transportation system’s effectiveness should be measured by comparing traffic congestion data before and after its implementation.
- This suggests a better way to evaluate the effectiveness of the transportation system but does not directly identify the flaw in the argument.
Step 4: Choose the Correct Answer The correct answer is A, “The increase in ridership may be due to reduced gasoline prices, not the new transportation system.” This choice reveals the logical flaw in the argument by offering an alternative explanation for the increase in ridership, weakening the connection between ridership and traffic congestion reduction.
The Last Word
Mastering flaw questions in the LSAT Logical Reasoning section requires careful analysis and the ability to identify the answer choice that exposes the logical weaknesses in the argument. By practicing this question type and developing a critical mindset, test-takers can confidently tackle flaw questions and showcase their analytical acumen on the LSAT.