PrepTest 139, Section 4, Question 15
Linguist: You philosophers say that we linguists do(63 more words not shown)
Of the following, which one(13 more words not shown)
- ATwo things can(9 more words not shown)
- BTwo sentences can(19 more words not shown)
- CIt is necessarily(11 more words not shown)
- DThe issue is(15 more words not shown)
- EA linguist has(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
“Identical in meaning” isn't the same as “identical in every respect.”
The two sentences put Joan and Ivan's names in a different order. We can agree on that physical difference. But both describe the same relationship between the same people: Joan and Ivan are siblings. Changing the order of their names doesn't by itself change what that statement means.
What we’re looking for
The philosopher has changed what the linguist needs to defend. The linguist isn't claiming the sentences look exactly alike or have every attribute in common. For the strongest logical counter, bring the discussion back to the actual claim about meaning. We don't have to win a different debate over whether physically different things can be completely identical.
Working the answers
- A
This takes on the philosopher's definition of complete identity. That isn't necessary to defend the linguist's position. The linguist can accept that physically different sentences aren't identical in every respect and still maintain that their meanings are the same.
- B
This describes the other direction: the same physical sentence can mean different things in different contexts. That may help illustrate a distinction between wording and meaning, but it doesn't directly answer the claim before us. Here, the sentences are physically different, and the disputed point is whether their meanings can nevertheless be identical.
- C
The sibling relationship does work in both directions, which helps explain why the sentences express the same relationship. But the philosopher's objection is that a physical difference prevents identical meaning. C doesn't directly expose that confusion between complete identity and identity in one respect. D does.
- DCorrect
This restores the actual issue. The linguist claimed the sentences mean the same thing, not that they share every physical feature. The philosopher's evidence of different name order therefore doesn't refute the claim. The two positions—different physical sentences and identical meanings—can stand together.
- E
Having more experience might make someone worth listening to, but it doesn't explain the mistake in this particular argument. The linguist has a direct reply available: the philosopher is answering a stronger claim than the one made. Appealing to comparative experience leaves that logical point unaddressed.
More Parallel Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.