PrepTest 116, Section 2, Question 12
Essayist: People once believed that Earth was at(48 more words not shown)
A flaw in the essayist's(5 more words not shown)
- Apresumes, without providing(12 more words not shown)
- Bneglects to consider(14 more words not shown)
- Cfails to consider(11 more words not shown)
- Doverlooks the fact(11 more words not shown)
- Eneglects the fact(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe Earth is important for some other reason.
The old reasoning was that Earth sat at the center of the universe and therefore Earth and its inhabitants mattered. We now have reason to reject that picture of Earth's location. But how does being wrong about the location prove they were wrong about the importance?
Even if being at the center would have made Earth important, it wouldn't follow that being at the center is the only way to be important. We might occupy an ordinary location and still matter for another reason. We haven't established such a reason here. We don't need to: the point is that the essayist hasn't ruled it out.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks us to identify that jump. I'd describe it as treating one proposed basis for importance as a requirement for importance. Removing the old basis doesn't settle whether its conclusion could still be true.
Working the answers
- A
This says that only true statements can have good reasons supporting belief in them. The essayist's mistake goes in a different direction: a particular reason for a belief has been discredited, so the belief is declared false. A concerns whether a well-supported belief could turn out false. Our problem is whether a badly supported belief could turn out true.
- BCorrect
A belief can be true even when someone's reason for believing it is wrong. People might have been mistaken about Earth's central location while still being right that Earth and its inhabitants are important.
B describes the problem a little differently from my initial prediction, but it reaches the same gap. Discrediting the old reason doesn't discredit every possible reason for the conclusion. And none of this proves the importance claim true; it shows why the essayist hasn't established that it's false.
- C
This claims that there cannot be a reason to disbelieve a statement that is true. That isn't what the essayist needs to address. The essayist is using an error in the old reasoning to declare its conclusion false. We need to leave open that a poorly supported conclusion can be true, not adopt a sweeping rule that true statements can never have reasons counting against them.
- D
People's views could change from century to century, or stay the same, without settling whether Earth is important. The essayist claims the old belief was false. A history of changing opinions doesn't resolve the difference between the truth of a belief and the quality of the reason offered for it.
- E
The same problem applies across cultures. Different cultures could disagree about their importance, but the existence of disagreement wouldn't show which view is correct. The relevant mistake is rejecting a conclusion because its old supporting reason failed, not overlooking variation in people's opinions.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.