PrepTest 131, Section 2, Question 6
Although Jaaks is a respected historian, her negative(60 more words not shown)
The reasoning above is flawed(3 more words not shown)
- Arelies on the(12 more words not shown)
- Battacks the person(10 more words not shown)
- Ctakes for granted(11 more words not shown)
- Dbases a general(10 more words not shown)
- Epresumes, without providing(16 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Jaaks says the book inaccurately portrays fishery workers. To answer that criticism, I want to know whether Yancey got their lives right.
Instead, the author tells us that Yancey's other books were popular and used the same research methods. Were those books accurate? We haven't been told. Reusing a method that produced popular books doesn't establish that the method produced reliable history. The new book's popularity in local bookstores doesn't settle that either. Readers could enjoy a book even if its account of the workers is mistaken.
What we’re looking for
The defense misses the point of the criticism. Jaaks didn't accuse Yancey of writing an unpopular book. For the flaw question, look for the unsupported move from popularity to accuracy.
Working the answers
- A
We aren't given evidence that a scholar is unqualified. Jaaks is described as a respected historian, and the defense doesn't rest on an unqualified person's expert assurance that Yancey is right. It rests on the popularity of Yancey's books.
- B
A personal attack would dismiss Jaaks by saying something like 'She plagiarizes, so ignore her criticism.' That isn't what happens. The author tries to answer her criticism with facts about Yancey's methods and popularity. The reply is inadequate, but it doesn't attack Jaaks as a person.
- CCorrect
The argument treats the popularity of Yancey's books as evidence that the account of fishery workers is accurate. But those are different qualities. The books could attract many readers without accurately describing these workers' lives, so the popularity evidence doesn't establish that Jaaks's review rests on a mistake.
- D
We have no reason to think the books mentioned form an unrepresentative sample. They might be the only other books Yancey has written. Even if all her books are popular, though, the accuracy question remains. The argument's problem is the move from one quality to another, not an established defect in the selection of examples.
- E
'Only' adds a claim the author doesn't make. The defense treats Yancey's methods as producing accurate results, but it doesn't say no other method could do so. Other historians could use different methods successfully, and that would be compatible with the defense. E's exclusivity claim isn't the assumption at issue.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.