PrepTest 134, Section 1, Question 5
Kennel club members who frequently discipline their dogs(34 more words not shown)
The argument is flawed in(8 more words not shown)
- Adogs' misbehavior is(10 more words not shown)
- Bdogs learn from(11 more words not shown)
- Cdiscipline does not(10 more words not shown)
- Dkennel club members(13 more words not shown)
- Ekennel club members(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe the dogs get disciplined because they misbehave.
The author notices that owners who discipline their dogs frequently also report more misbehavior. Then the author blames the discipline. But picture an owner whose dog already misbehaves often. That owner might respond by disciplining the dog more often. An owner with a well-behaved dog might rarely need to do so. We'd see exactly the reported association without discipline being the cause of the bad behavior.
Keep the two stories straight. The author's story is “more discipline leads to more misbehavior.” Our alternative is “more misbehavior leads to more discipline.” Knowing that the two occur together doesn't tell us which story is right. Discipline might even improve the first dog's behavior somewhat while that dog still misbehaves more than the dog that needed little discipline to begin with.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks what possibility the argument overlooks. I want the answer to challenge that causal direction: the misbehavior could be prompting the discipline. We don't have to prove that this alternative is what actually happens. Its possibility is enough to show that the author's evidence doesn't establish the claimed cause.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The dogs' misbehavior could cause the frequent discipline. That is our alternative: owners may discipline these dogs more because the dogs already misbehave more. The same association would then appear for a reason other than discipline encouraging bad behavior. The author treats the association as though it settles the direction of the cause.
- B
Dogs learning how their owners react doesn't establish what caused the reported misbehavior. They could remember their owners' reactions whether discipline increased misbehavior, reduced it, or had little effect. We need a possibility that exposes the faulty inference, not just a fact about dogs' memories.
- C
Cats, fish, and other animals aren't the subject of this conclusion. Discipline could have a different effect on another kind of animal without challenging the inference about dogs. We need to examine the evidence connecting discipline and canine behavior.
- D
Both groups being compared consist of kennel club members. Comparing those members' skill with the skill of other owners doesn't explain why frequent disciplinarians within the club report more misbehavior than members who rarely discipline. Better average skill than outsiders leaves that causal question open.
- E
This also switches the comparison. The passage compares kennel club members who frequently discipline with members who rarely or never discipline. E compares kennel club members overall with other dog owners. Even if club members use discipline more often than outsiders, that doesn't establish whether discipline causes misbehavior or responds to it. How often a broader group uses discipline is different from what the discipline does.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.