PrepTest 104, Section 4, Question 7
If you know a lot about history, it(61 more words not shown)
The argument's reasoning is flawed(7 more words not shown)
- Amany intellectuals are(5 more words not shown)
- Bthere are people(9 more words not shown)
- Cit is more(13 more words not shown)
- Dthere are other(11 more words not shown)
- Epeople who are(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What if you can impress the intellectuals by juggling? Knowing a lot of history is one easy way to impress them, according to the first sentence. It doesn't have to be the only one. A remarkable musical performance or a clever piece of engineering could also do the job.
The requirement to read lots of history books doesn't close that gap. Accept that someone who hasn't done the reading won't know much history. That shuts off the history route. It doesn't shut off every other route to making a good impression.
What we’re looking for
So when the author concludes that a person who lacks that history knowledge won't find it easy to impress intellectuals, the author has gone too far. The flaw question asks what possibility was overlooked. We already have it: another easy way to impress these people, without knowing history.
Working the answers
- A
The intellectuals don't have to be widely read in history to be impressed by someone else's knowledge of it. More importantly, the argument is about how you could impress them, not how much history they know. Their reading habits don't identify the missing possibility that you have another easy way to impress them.
- B
Finding it easy to impress someone doesn't mean you actually do it. A knowledgeable person might never talk to the intellectuals or might make no effort to impress them. So this possibility can fit the first premise. It also doesn't address the conclusion's problem: whether someone without history knowledge could easily impress intellectuals in another way.
- C
Who it is more important to impress is a separate question. Even if impressing nonintellectuals matters more, we can still ask whether history knowledge is required to impress intellectuals easily. A judgment about which audience deserves our attention doesn't expose the mistaken reasoning about how to impress this one.
- DCorrect
This is the alternative route the author ignores. Perhaps your juggling is so impressive that intellectuals are easily impressed even though you haven't read a history book. The first premise can remain true: history knowledge would also make it easy to impress them. The conclusion fails because it treats that one successful route as a requirement for every successful route.
- E
It may be easier to impress nonintellectuals, but that comparison doesn't settle how to impress intellectuals. Both groups could be easy to impress through several different talents. The argument's problem concerns the supposed need for history knowledge with this particular audience, not which audience is easier overall.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.