LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

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

 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5153
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#38290
No worries, kuma-turtle, we're happy to try to help you see it! The author here wants us to believe that the fact that these brilliant economists HAVE the plan is evidence that they think the plan is GOOD. Answer D is suggesting that their having the plan is not evidence of any such thing. What if they have it simply because their employer supplied it to them? They may think it's lousy, but hey, it's free and comes standard with the job, so whatever. Or maybe they do think it's good, even great. The point is just that having it doesn't tell us they like it - we need more info before we can conclude that.

I hope that helps!
 kuma-turtle
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: Aug 07, 2017
|
#38341
Thank you very much for the explanation!
User avatar
 Snomen
  • Posts: 35
  • Joined: Sep 30, 2021
|
#94429
My problem with D is that I thought that we should accept Premises as true.., and D throws a shadow on a premise that's why I hesitated in choosing it. It's kinda saying no to the premise (clearly recognized). Can anyone please clarify this?
Thank you in advance.
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5153
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#94473
That claim is more than just a premise, snomen - it's a sub-conclusion, and it's based on an unjustified assumption that the economists chose the plan. Note the use of "thus" in that claim, a conclusion indicator - since they have "thus" clearly recognized.

That said, while we rarely attack premises in Flaw questions, it does happen sometimes. We should be focused primarily on why the premises do not support the conclusion, but if a premise is logically flawed in some way then it's fair game.
User avatar
 ashpine17
  • Posts: 321
  • Joined: Apr 06, 2021
|
#98976
for c it says main conclusion but i accidently read it as sub conclusion; if it had been the sub conclusion would this have been correct? is "supposed experts" a problem here?
User avatar
 ashpine17
  • Posts: 321
  • Joined: Apr 06, 2021
|
#98977
the notion of choice did bother me a lot while readng thes timulus but i thinkit can go either way. even if their employer did choose the plan for them, it doesn't necessarily follow that they think the plan is bad. for all we know, they think the plan is good. that' why i have big issues iwth D.
 Luke Haqq
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 722
  • Joined: Apr 26, 2012
|
#99446
Hi ashpine17!

You ask,

for c it says main conclusion but i accidently read it as sub conclusion; if it had been the sub conclusion would this have been correct? is "supposed experts" a problem here?
To the second question, I can see how one might interpret the stimulus as teeing up an appeal to expertise as the flaw in the reasoning. The second sentence of the stimulus indicates that a set of economists won a prestigious prize and also all have the Acme retirement plan (and this is in an advertisement). Perhaps economists or the specific subset of them mentioned are comparatively likely to be experts on what the best retirement options are. But it's also worth noting that the stimulus doesn't anywhere connect these dots in terms of how their expertise qualifies them on retirement plans. So a problematic appeal to expertise is reasonably a flaw that one might prephrase after reading this stimulus.

To the first question, even though that type of flaw is mentioned in (C), this answer is still problematic. I don't see how changing "main conclusion" to "subconclusion" would make it correct. Answer choice (C) states, "It appeals to the fact that supposed experts have endorsed the argument's main conclusion, rather than appealing to direct evidence for that conclusion." The italicized language seems problematic. The conclusion in the stimulus is: "it is probably a good plan for anyone with retirement needs similar to theirs." The advertisement doesn't say that the mentioned economists endorsed that the retirement plans they have are a good plan for people with similar needs as theirs.

Instead, answer choice (D) mentions a different flaw and is accurately tracking what is in the stimulus. Answer choice (D) states, "It takes for granted that some winners of the Economic Merit Prize have deliberately selected the Acme retirement plan, rather than having had it chosen for them by their employers." The advertisement does too much with the fact that the mentioned subset of economists all have the same retirement plan. You mention,

even if their employer did choose the plan for them, it doesn't necessarily follow that they think the plan is bad. for all we know, they think the plan is good. that' why i have big issues iwth D
Yes, based on the language of the advertisement, we don't know one way or another whether the economists like or don't like the plans they have. This is why the advertisement does too much with the fact that they --have-- this particular plan--it seems like the advertisement assumes that their having the plan implies that they endorse the plan. That's not necessarily the case, they might dislike the plan, or they might be neutral on the plan and have it because their employer selected it for them.
User avatar
 Matooki
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: Jul 25, 2023
|
#102530
Hello,

I am having some trouble with the wording of the correct answer (D).

I feel as though the phrasing "It takes for granted" in "It takes for granted that some winners of the EMC have deliberately selected the ACME retirement plan......" makes it sound as the argument is not acknowledging that some of them may have chose it themselves which to me sounds more like supporting the conclusion rather than finding a flaw.

I understand I am probably misinterpreting the phrase "It takes for granted" but I would appreciate an explanation. :)
User avatar
 Dave Killoran
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5850
  • Joined: Mar 25, 2011
|
#102550
Hi Matooki,

Thanks for the question! "Takes for granted" is identical in meaning to "assumes." So, answer choice (D) is simply saying that the argument assumes that some winners chose the plan for themselves.

Thanks!
User avatar
 Matooki
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: Jul 25, 2023
|
#102556
Thank you Dave!

That is very good to know.

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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