PrepTest 112, Section 1, Question 10
Cotrell is, at best, able to write magazine(45 more words not shown)
The argument is most vulnerable(9 more words not shown)
- AIt simply ignores(5 more words not shown)
- BIt generalizes from(2 more words not shown)
- CIt presupposes what(4 more words not shown)
- DIt relies on(13 more words not shown)
- EIt infers limits(9 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
How can Cotrell's better articles prove that Cotrell cannot write better articles?
The author says Cotrell is capable of average work at best. Then the supposed best evidence is a few superior articles Cotrell submitted. Those sound like a problem for the claim. If Cotrell wrote them, they would show an ability above the alleged ceiling.
The author gets around that problem by declaring the superior articles plagiarized. But why think they were copied? Because Cotrell is supposedly incapable of writing anything better than average. That is the very claim we were waiting for the author to establish.
We have gone in a circle: Cotrell cannot write superior work, so the superior work must be copied; the allegedly copied work then proves Cotrell cannot write superior work. There is no independent reason for the crucial judgment about ability. It is like recommending a class solely on the ground that people should take that class: repeating the recommendation hasn't supplied a reason for it.
What we’re looking for
The flaw answer should capture that circular support. The author relies on the conclusion in deciding what the evidence means, then offers that interpretation as proof of the conclusion.
Working the answers
- A
The superior articles are potential evidence against the claim, but the author doesn't simply ignore them. They are explicitly discussed and dismissed as plagiarism. The flaw is the reason for dismissing them: the author assumes the very limit on Cotrell's ability that needs to be proved.
- B
The author doesn't treat the few superior articles as typical and conclude that Cotrell is a superior writer. Instead, the author refuses to credit Cotrell with writing them. The argument is about explaining away the exceptions, not generalizing from them.
- CCorrect
To “presuppose what it seeks to establish” is to assume the point that the argument is supposed to prove. Here, the conclusion is that Cotrell cannot write above-average articles. The author then uses that same claim to decide that any superior article must have been plagiarized.
That accusation supplies no independent support because it already depends on accepting the conclusion. We would need some separate reason to think those articles were copied or that Cotrell lacked the ability. Repeating the ability claim inside the explanation doesn't provide one.
- D
No expert's judgment is cited. We aren't told that an authority in one field has offered an opinion outside that field. The problem lies in the author's own repeated claim, so D introduces a feature the argument doesn't contain.
- E
The argument doesn't infer Cotrell's limits from a few unusually poor performances. The notable articles are superior, not lapses below the usual standard. The author discounts successes by calling them plagiarism. E describes judging ability from failures, which is a different pattern.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.