LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8917
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#35667
Complete Question Explanation

Flaw in the Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (B)

This is a bait-and-switch argument. The legislator refers to overwhelming opposition to high
taxes as support for a bill to reduce corporate income tax. There are at least two issues with this
rationale: first, constituents generally oppose taxes that they have to pay, rather than taxes borne by
corporations (although corporate taxes are paid indirectly by shareholders). Second, “high taxes”
is patently subjective and although nearly all respondents oppose high taxes, there is no evidence
to suggest that any of them think the current corporate income tax rate is high. The argument is
vulnerable to either criticism.

Answer choice (A): It is always possible to question the representativeness of a survey sample.
However, the use of a leading question (“Do you favor high taxes?”) and the extremely high
proportion responding “no” suggest that most samples might respond similarly. Furthermore, the
legislator’s use of the survey is more problematic than the sample itself.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. This is the second criticism discussed
above. Since we do not know if the constituents consider the current corporate income tax rate to be
high, we cannot confirm or refute the legislator’s claim based on the survey alone.

Answer choice (C): This is an inaccurate description of the survey’s results. The survey demonstrates
the existence of opposition to high taxes, but does not reveal anything about the constituents’ feeling
toward the bill (not even the absence of opposition to it). Rather, the argument confuses support for a
general principle with support for a specific action which may or may not apply that principle.

Answer choice (D): This is a description of a circular argument. The author clearly distinguishes
between the premises and conclusion here, and does not restate the survey evidence as the
conclusion.

Answer choice (E): As with answer choice (C), this answer is incorrect because the survey does not
reveal anything about how the public feels about this bill. The argument demonstrates support for a
general principle and infers support for a bill that has not been shown to reflect that principle.
 Jkjones3789
  • Posts: 89
  • Joined: Mar 12, 2014
|
#16631
Hello, In this flaw question I thought it was an appeal to popular opinion but then decided it wasn't since nothing about the public was mentioned. The I thought it was an evidentiary flaw but it wasn't that either. Please explain this question to me .
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5153
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#16682
I'm not sure how I would categorize this one, but I think it is a type of evidentiary flaw. I might lump this one in with "lack of relevant evidence" because the author hasn't defined what a "high" tax is or provided evidence that the current corporate rate meets that definition. I also considered that it might be an error of division - just because the constituents don't support high taxes generally doesn't mean they don't support ANY high tax. And, it could be viewed as a false dilemma - just because they don't like high taxes doesn't mean they support lower taxes (maybe the current rate is just fine?) You could even say it makes a comparative mistake (like relating two things incorrectly, which is just an Evidence Flaw) - just because they don't like "high" taxes doesn't mean you have to lower some taxes (because "lower" doesn't mean the same as "low" and "higher" doesn't mean the same as "high").

In the end, don't worry too much about what category it fits in. Instead, ask yourself what's wrong with the argument, and feel free to answer that question using your own words if none of the standard flaw types comes right to mind. Then just match up the answer choice to your prephrase.

One item to note - a false appeal to popular opinion does not have be based on the general public. You can make such a flaw by arguing that "most of my friends think X" or "lots of people at my workplace believe Y", and then concluding that X or Y must be true.
 mokkyukkyu
  • Posts: 97
  • Joined: Aug 17, 2016
|
#28197
Hi, I was just wondering...about B I was not sure because the assumption is not necessary...
Even 1% lower tax would be great for ppl wouldn't it?
So I thought there's no need to assume it should be high tax...in either case they will agree with lowering the tax.
I did not really like other choices so when I did this question I was lost---thought nothing is good.
I chose A in the end because it sounds familiar faw...
 Shannon Parker
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 147
  • Joined: Jun 08, 2016
|
#28217
Hi there,

Be careful to stick to the wording and not worry about the real world, and whether or not the constituents would actually be happy about the lowering of taxes. The constituents statement that they are not in favor of high taxes does mean that they want them lowered. Consider this illustration; if i ask you if you like the temperature really hot (high), and you say no, this does not automatically imply that you will be in favor of me turning it down. If the temperature is at sixty degrees and you get cold at fifty-nine, then you will not be in favor of me turning it down.

Stick with the logic of the argument, just because you are not in favor of one thing, does not mean that you are in favor of something else.

Hope this helps.

~Shannon
 fg6118
  • Posts: 26
  • Joined: Apr 18, 2016
|
#29133
I don't understand why answer c is wrong. I thought that the author was using the poll and how 97% said no as the "existence of evidence that the legislator's constituents support that bill" when in reality there is no evidence in the stimulus that they would oppose the bill. Why does answer b better address the flaw rather than c?
 Clay Cooper
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: Jul 03, 2015
|
#29170
Hi fg6118,

Thanks for your question.

You are correct that there is no evidence that they would oppose the bill. But C incorrectly describes what happens in the stimulus. Answer choice C says that the argument confuses the absence of some evidence of opposition with the existence of evidence of support; that is not what is happening here. The author does not mention any kind of lack of evidence or absence of evidence. Instead, the author cites evidence (the 97% who do not want high taxes) - but that evidence does not necessarily prove anything, since we don't know that the respondents to that survey consider the corporate tax high.

Does that make sense? It always helps me with flaw and method of reasoning questions to get as concrete and literal as possible - if an answer choice mentions a lack of evidence being mistaken for something else, find where that occurs. No one mentions a lack of evidence here; instead, we are given evidence, but it doesn't prove what the author is trying to prove with it.

I hope that helps.
 ShannonOh22
  • Posts: 70
  • Joined: Aug 15, 2019
|
#71365
Adam Tyson wrote: One item to note - a false appeal to popular opinion does not have be based on the general public. You can make such a flaw by arguing that "most of my friends think X" or "lots of people at my workplace believe Y", and then concluding that X or Y must be true.
I ruled A out because the argument specifically deals with the Legislator's constituents...are you saying in your explanation above that this is not a reason to eliminate an "appeal to popular opinion" answer choice? How are we to distinguish between a valid argument and an invalid argument if we can't use the basis of the general public in an "appeal to popular opinion"?

What are the criteria for identifying a flawed appeal to opinion? Basing a conclusion on the survey results of a finite group of people? This happens all the time in LR questions, so I'm confused.

Also - can you please explain why C is incorrect? I've read the previous explanations, but still don't get it.
 Paul Marsh
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: Oct 15, 2019
|
#71548
Hi Shannon! You are totally correct in ruling out answer choice (A) for the reason you stated - the argument is only talking about the constituents.

I don't believe Adam's statement was referring to answer choice (A). I can't speak for him, but I think what he was saying is that a false appeal to popular opinion Flaw can be based upon either the general public as a whole, OR upon a very small part of the public. For example, the following argument is a false appeal to popular opinion:

Everybody seems to like the new Batman movie. Therefore it must good.

The following is also a false appeal to popular opinion:

My friends Joe and Sally like the new Batman movie. Therefore it must be good.

Using popular opinion as a premise for a conclusion about quality is a false appeal to popular opinion Flaw, regardless of whether that "popular opinion" is that of the whole public or that of just a couple people. Basically anytime an argument says that a position is true because people think it's true, that's what a flawed appeal to popular opinion is. I think that's all Adam was trying to say.

As for your last question, answer choice (C) is incorrect because the Legislator doesn't support his argument by showing evidence of lack of opposition to his bill. Instead he supports his argument by showing affirmative support from his constituents on an issue (but unfortunately for his argument, his conclusion changes what that issue is). If the stimulus said something like, "My staff attended a town hall meeting and asked constituents if they supported reducing the corporate income tax. Only 3% of people raised their hands. Therefore my constituents would support my bill," then (C) would be a good answer. Hope that helps!
 mseggio
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: Sep 21, 2021
|
#93891
After initially diagramming this argument, my pre-phrase was something along the lines of:
- "this poll was too vague, some of the constituents may support lower PERSONAL INCOME taxes, but NOT CORPORATE INCOME TAXES" (easily represented by ANS choice B)

But, moving to the answer choices with that in mind, I found that idea hard to match (as I do with many other flaw questions) to the answer choices quickly and effectively, as they usually are not directly correlated to the pre-phrase associated. Instead, it seems as if most, if not all, flaw type questions have answer choices that deal more with argumentative structure (or associated terminology) than actual "factual" or "detailed" responses.

So, what are some ways to ensure I can be both efficient and accurate when approaching flawed reasoning questions?

Thanks!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.