PrepTest 134, Section 2, Question 6
Beck: Our computer program estimates municipal automotive use(33 more words not shown)
The reasoning in Beck's argument(5 more words not shown)
- Afails to establish(9 more words not shown)
- Bfails to consider(10 more words not shown)
- Ctakes for granted(13 more words not shown)
- Dregards accuracy as(8 more words not shown)
- Efails to consider(9 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
You can be consistently wrong.
Imagine I tell you that I make a billion dollars a year. You ask again next week, and I give you the same answer. Then I repeat it the week after that. My story is remarkably consistent. Have I established that I actually make a billion dollars? Of course not. Repeating a false claim doesn't turn it into a true one.
The computer program could have the same problem. Its estimates stay similar from week to week, but we still don't know how well those estimates match actual automotive use. Maybe the program makes the same mistake every week.
What we’re looking for
That's what the flaw answer needs to capture. Beck uses consistency as evidence of accuracy without considering that consistent results could be inaccurate. We don't need to show that the staff's suspicions are right. We need to show why Beck hasn't answered them.
Working the answers
- A
Beck isn't choosing consistency over accuracy because consistency matters more. Beck is using consistency to conclude that the program is accurate. Comparing the importance of the two qualities would leave that faulty inference untouched.
- B
Maybe the program also tracks coffee consumption and does that perfectly. That wouldn't show that its automotive estimates are correct. Accuracy on a different task doesn't establish accuracy on this one, so Beck doesn't need to investigate every other task to address the staff's concern.
- C
This describes the possibility Beck overlooks, not a fact Beck takes for granted. If Beck accepted that inaccurate estimates could still be consistent, the defense of the program would be less convincing. Beck's reasoning instead treats the consistency as a reason to trust the estimates.
- D
The conclusion concerns accuracy, not the program's overall value. Beck could think speed, cost, and ease of use also matter when deciding whether the program is worth having. None of that would fix the inference from stable estimates to accurate estimates.
- ECorrect
The output might be consistent and inaccurate, just like the repeated billion-dollar claim. We would need some connection between the program's figures and actual automotive use to establish accuracy. Knowing only that the figures resemble last week's figures doesn't provide that connection.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.