PrepTest 131, Section 1, Question 18
In a poll of a representative sample of(53 more words not shown)
The argument is most vulnerable(5 more words not shown)
- Aoverlooks the possibility(17 more words not shown)
- Bdoes not indicate(17 more words not shown)
- Ctakes for granted(26 more words not shown)
- Doverlooks the possibility(33 more words not shown)
- Eoverlooks the possibility(22 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A poll can tell us what residents prefer without proving which city is objectively best. People might favor the place where they already live. But this conclusion is about their preferences, and the sample is explicitly representative, so we should focus on what the votes actually establish.
My first concern is the jump from “largest” to “large.” The biggest city in a sparsely populated region might still be small. The largest shrimp is still a small animal; similarly, being the largest city in this province does not by itself establish that it is a large city.
There is another jump in the numbers. “Most often selected” can mean more votes than any individual rival, not more votes than all the rivals together. Suppose the capital gets 40 votes and three small cities get 20 each. The capital wins individually, but 60 of the 100 voters chose small cities.
What we’re looking for
For the flaw, that leaves us with questions about both size and the claimed majority. The author needs support for saying most residents generally prefer large-city life. A single city finishing first does not automatically supply it.
Working the answers
- A
The conclusion concerns residents of this province, which is the population sampled. It does not extend the result to other people. Different preferences elsewhere therefore do not expose a mistake in the stated inference.
- B
Residents of other provinces are outside the conclusion too. We could learn that they prefer large cities or small cities without settling what this province's poll shows about its own residents.
- C
The poll asks for the best place to live, and nothing suggests respondents answered a different question or deliberately concealed their preferences. Even if every answer accurately represented the voter's view, the author's inference about a majority would still be unsupported. C does not identify that problem.
- D
This concerns the motives of people who rejected the capital, not the people whose votes the author uses to infer a preference for large cities. Someone could dislike living in a capital while generally liking large-city life, so this alternative motive does not challenge that supposed preference. It also tells us nothing about how the small-city votes add up against the capital's total.
- ECorrect
Votes for the small cities could add up to a majority even though the capital beats each small city individually. In our example, 40 beats each group of 20, but the three groups together make 60. The city receiving the largest share has a plurality; more than half the votes would be a majority. The argument treats the first as if it establishes the second. E captures that mistake even if we grant that the capital really is large.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.