Lesson 5.4: Flaw Questions in Practice

Introduction

In the LSAT Logical Reasoning section, flaw questions are crucial for evaluating your ability to identify and analyze arguments. These questions challenge you to find specific reasoning errors in given stimuli. In this lesson, we will focus on developing a systematic method for tackling flaw questions, enabling you to approach these problems with confidence and precision. By the end of this lesson, you will be able to identify conclusions, pinpoint gaps in reasoning, and accurately name logical fallacies.

Learning Objectives

Understand a method for flaw questions: find the conclusion, find the gap, name the error.
Develop skills for eliminating answer choices that describe errors the argument did not make.
Apply a consistent method to flaw questions under time constraints.
Reject plausible-sounding but inapplicable flaw descriptions.
Explain the main ideas and terminology behind Lesson 5.4: Flaw Questions in Practice.

Understanding Flaw Questions

Flaw questions require you to assess the strength of an argument by identifying its weaknesses. These questions commonly ask you to pick the answer choice that best describes the error in reasoning made by the argument.

Identifying Flaw Questions

Flaw questions often contain phrases like:

“The reasoning is flawed because...”
“Which of the following describes a flaw in the argument?”
“The argument is based on a questionable assumption...”

When you see these phrases, know that you are dealing with a flaw question. The key is to follow a systematic approach to analyze the argument.

The Three-Step Method for Flaw Questions

Find the Conclusion: Identify the main point of the argument. The conclusion is typically the statement that the author is trying to prove or persuade you of.
Find the Gap: Look for the connection—or lack thereof—between the evidence provided and the conclusion. This is where the reasoning falls short.
Name the Error: After identifying the gap, determine the specific type of flaw present. This might be circular reasoning, a false cause, or another logical fallacy.

Example 1: Identifying the Conclusion and Gap

Argument: "If the athlete practices for 5 hours every day, they will definitely win the championship. Therefore, since John practices for 5 hours daily, he will win the championship.”

Find the Conclusion: The conclusion is “John will win the championship.”
Find the Gap: The reasoning suggests that practicing guarantees a win. However, there are many factors that can influence victory in a championship.
Name the Error: This argument commits the fallacy of assuming that correlation implies causation. Just because John practices does not mean he will definitely win; other conditions affect the outcome.

Common Types of Flaws in Arguments

1. Circular Reasoning

Circular reasoning occurs when the argument's conclusion is simply a rephrasing of its premise.

Example:

Argument: “Everyone wants to buy the most popular sneakers because they are the best shoes.”

Conclusion: The sneakers are the best shoes.
Gap: The premise does not provide evidence beyond public opinion; it simply restates the conclusion.
Flaw: This is circular reasoning.

2. Ad Hominem Fallacy

An ad hominem fallacy occurs when an argument attacks a person's character rather than addressing the argument itself.

Example:

Argument: “We shouldn’t listen to her opinion on climate change because she is not a scientist.”

Conclusion: Dismissing her opinion.
Gap: The conclusion does not consider the validity of her arguments, only her qualifications.
Flaw: This represents an ad hominem approach that undermines the argument.

3. False Cause

False cause errors arise when an argument mistakenly links two events as directly related.

Example:

Argument: “Since the introduction of a new training regimen, the team's performance has improved; thus, the regimen must be responsible.”

Conclusion: The training regimen is what improved performance.
Gap: Other factors, like player skill or competition level, could also have contributed to the improvement.
Flaw: This is a classic example of the false cause fallacy.

Eliminating Incorrect Answer Choices

When approaching multiple-choice questions about flaws, remember:

Read Carefully: Make sure that each choice accurately describes the flaw in the argument. It is critical to distinguish between plausible-sounding options and those that are applicable.
Focus on the Gaps: Use the gaps you identified to systematically eliminate options that do not directly address the argument's specific weakness.
Practice: The more flawed arguments you analyze, the better you become at recognizing patterns in reasoning errors.

Example 2: Eliminating Incorrect Answers

Argument: “The city should invest more in public parks. After all, when we invest in parks, property values increase.”

Conclusion: The city should invest in parks.
Gap: The argument assumes that higher property values are the only benefit from investing in parks.
Flaw: This argument can be flawed in suggesting that increased property values justify the investment without exploring other benefits or values of parks.

Question: Which of the following describes a flaw in the argument?

Answer Choices:

A) Assumes that one factor provides all the benefits.

B) Far too simplistic in its reasoning.

C) Ignores potential negative impacts of park investments.

D) Overlooks other factors that contribute to property values.

Correct Answer: A) Assumes that one factor provides all the benefits.
Elimination: B) While simplistic, it does not directly address a specific flaw. C and D do not accurately represent the specific gap identified in the reasoning.

Conclusion

Flaw questions require you to dissect an argument to discover its weaknesses. By mastering the steps of identifying conclusions, gaps, and naming errors, you will enhance your logical reasoning capabilities.

Additionally, practice is essential. Working through various types of flawed arguments will sharpen your skills and prepare you for success on the LSAT.

Study Notes

Flaw questions test your ability to analyze logical arguments.
Use the three-step method: find the conclusion, find the gap, name the error.
Common flaws include circular reasoning, ad hominem, and false cause.
Eliminate answer choices that do not address the specific flaw in the argument.
Practice with various examples to boost your proficiency in identifying flaws.