PrepTest 105, Section 1, Question 26
Marion knows that the bridge on her usual(74 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the argument(5 more words not shown)
- Amistakes a situation(14 more words not shown)
- Bignores the fact(21 more words not shown)
- Cassumes without justification(23 more words not shown)
- Dtreats evidence that(21 more words not shown)
- Eoverlooks the possibility(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
She hates the train. That doesn't mean she can't take it.
The bridge closure creates a real obstacle to driving. To drive and arrive on time, Marion would have to leave at least 45 minutes early. But she must first visit the bank, which won't be open in time for that departure. So the driving plan doesn't get her both the bank visit and an on-time arrival.
The train is the exception the passage leaves available. Marion might dislike it and still choose it because getting to work on time matters more today. Her preference is evidence about what she is inclined to do, not a barrier that makes the other option impossible.
What we’re looking for
For the flaw question, that's the jump to look for: the author moves from Marion's dislike of the train to the claim that she cannot avoid lateness. The bank's hours explain why she can't follow the early-driving plan; they don't turn her dislike of the train into an inability to use it.
Working the answers
- A
The bridge closure could affect many other people. The argument doesn't have to deny that to discuss Marion's situation. Its error lies in what it infers from her preference, not in treating her as the only person affected by the bridge.
- B
This concerns whether people work out every consequence of what they know. We aren't told that Marion failed to consider a consequence, and the argument's mistake doesn't depend on her doing so. Even if she understands the bridge closure and bank schedule perfectly, disliking the train doesn't make the train unavailable.
- C
The argument doesn't begin with a general claim about what people prefer and apply it to Marion. It directly tells us that Marion hates taking the train. The unsupported move comes after that individual fact, when the author treats it as excluding another action she could take.
- DCorrect
The abstract wording can obscure a simple match. The evidence is Marion's dislike of the train. The course of action it makes more likely is avoiding the train and driving. The alternative course is taking the train despite that dislike.
The author treats evidence favoring the first choice as though it rules out the second. But someone can do something unpleasant to avoid an even less desirable outcome. Marion could decide that being on time is worth a train ride. We don't need to guarantee what she will choose; we only need to see why the evidence doesn't establish that lateness is unavoidable.
- E
Marion has an understandable reason to consider taking the train: avoiding lateness. The objection doesn't require her to act for no good reason. More generally, the argument's mistake is treating a preference as eliminating an option, not failing to imagine completely unmotivated behavior.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.