PrepTest 147, Section 4, Question 18
Pundit: For many high school graduates, attending a(38 more words not shown)
The pundit's argument is most(8 more words not shown)
- Afails to establish(15 more words not shown)
- Boverlooks the possibility(16 more words not shown)
- Cprovides no justification(19 more words not shown)
- Dtakes for granted(19 more words not shown)
- Etakes for granted(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Could college help these graduates get something else they need? Having initiative, flexibility, and practical problem-solving skills doesn't mean they already have everything a corporate employer might want.
Suppose a job requires a university degree, or specialized chemistry knowledge a student could gain in a university program. A high school graduate could have all three qualities the pundit praises and still benefit from attending. College might also help someone meet people who connect them to job opportunities. These are possible advantages, not facts we have to assume about every employer.
What we’re looking for
We could also point out that some graduates still need to develop the three qualities. But the pundit's claim concerns many graduates who already have them. The more direct problem is that having the most-valued attributes doesn't rule out getting something else useful or required from college. That's the gap we need the flaw answer to describe.
Working the answers
- A
The pundit doesn't need to show that university graduates lack these qualities. Even if university graduates have them, the pundit could still claim that the high school graduates in question already have them too. The missing issue is whether college adds another benefit, not whether college graduates possess the three listed traits.
- BCorrect
A corporation might require something that a candidate can get only through attending a university. A degree is a simple possible example. Initiative and flexibility could be highly valued while still being insufficient to meet that requirement. In that case, attending a university would help a graduate who already had all three listed qualities, contrary to the pundit's reasoning.
- C
Saying corporations value these attributes most doesn't mean they hire only people who have them. The pundit doesn't need that absolute hiring rule to make the argument. What the pundit does need is a reason to dismiss the other things university attendance might offer these graduates.
- D
The conclusion is limited to whether college helps certain graduates get corporate jobs. It doesn't say improving job prospects is the only reason anyone attends college, or that college is useless for every other purpose. Someone could accept many noncareer reasons to attend and still make the pundit's narrow argument.
- E
The argument says many high school graduates already have the traits. It doesn't claim they acquired them through study, or that university study is the way to acquire them. How those particular traits are learned isn't the overlooked benefit identified in B.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.