PrepTest 115, Section 2, Question 2
Any course that teaches students how to write(39 more words not shown)
A flaw in the reasoning(7 more words not shown)
- Afails to specify(11 more words not shown)
- Bdraws a weaker(10 more words not shown)
- Cpresumes, without providing(18 more words not shown)
- Dfails to consider(16 more words not shown)
- Edraws a conclusion(24 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Some philosophy courses teach writing. What about the philosophy course that doesn't? We can accept the rule that learning to write will serve students well later in life. We can also accept that some philosophy courses teach that skill. Those courses therefore have the promised benefit. But the conclusion sends a student to any philosophy course, including one for which we've been told nothing about writing.
Imagine choosing between a philosophy course that teaches essay writing and one taught entirely through lectures and multiple-choice exams. The first fits the evidence. The second might be useful too, but we would need another reason to know that. We can't give every philosophy course the benefit established for the writing courses.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks us to describe that jump from some courses to any course. The student's major isn't what causes the problem. The argument hasn't established the benefit for every course the student could choose.
Working the answers
- A
We don't need to know whether the teacher uses writing exercises, essays, or another method. The argument gives us the fact that some courses teach writing, and we can accept it. The gap concerns the other philosophy courses, not the teaching method inside the courses that do teach writing.
- B
The conclusion is stronger than the evidence warrants. The evidence covers some philosophy courses; the conclusion covers all of them. Drawing a weaker conclusion would mean claiming less than the evidence establishes, which isn't the mistake here.
- C
This describes moving from a whole to its individual parts. Our argument doesn't start with a claim about philosophy education as a whole and then assign that property to each course. It starts with some individual courses and extends the benefit to every philosophy course. Read the direction of the proposed mistake instead of choosing an answer just because it mentions wholes and parts.
- D
A student might be required to take philosophy and still find the assigned course useless. Or a completely optional course might be useful. Whether the course is required doesn't establish the benefit the author claims for every philosophy course.
- ECorrect
The evidence establishes that some philosophy courses will serve students well: the ones that teach writing. The conclusion expands that benefit to any philosophy course. Nothing establishes that all philosophy courses teach writing or supplies a different reason that the remaining courses will help students later. Those remaining courses might help, but this argument hasn't shown it.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.