- Thu Feb 18, 2016 5:36 pm
#22174
Hey Sarah,
Thanks for the question! In this case—a Flaw-Except question—we've got an argument so flawed that four of the answers (the four that are incorrect) each describes a different mistake, so let's see if we can figure out exactly what's gone wrong for the lawyer here.
The lawyer really makes two big, and related, mistakes: one is assuming that just because the witness believes Congleton assigned the best available workers to the project, that the witness must come to the logical conclusion and believe that Congleton wanted the project to succeed (in other words, assuming that the witness would draw a reasonable conclusion from the stated facts, when instead the witness could be illogical/wrong but still honest); the other is attempting to infer Congleton's desires from Congleton's actions (that is, assigning great people means Congleton wanted the project to succeed).
Each of the incorrect answers describes a version of one of those two errors:
(A) states that the assignments weren't Congleton's choice, so Congleton could have wanted the project to fail and been forced to assign good people anyway
(C) tells us that Congleton could have assigned talented people with an ulterior motive designed to undermine the project: the collective group would not work well together, and Congleton knew that when making assignments
(D) deals with the first error I described above, by saying that the witness could have been telling the truth about her belief that Congleton wanted the project to fail, even though the evidence seems to suggest otherwise (i.e. the witness drew a very questionable conclusion, but was at least honest/earnest in her beliefs about it)
(E), like (C), describes an undermining action by Congleton: assigning great people but not allotting enough time or resources for them to succeed...Congleton wanted the project to fail, and made efforts to that end not with the hires, but with the time/resources
Answer choice (B), on the other hand, doesn't address the lawyer's argument at all. Put simply, at no point does the project's actual success or failure come up, and certainly nothing about failure depending on Congleton's desires; it's only about what Congleton really wants and whether the witness is being truthful in her beliefs.
Remember, correct answers in Flaw questions—just like correct answers in Must Be True—have to first and foremost be accurate with respect to the facts in the stimulus. So as soon as an answer choices describes something that didn't actually occur, you can immediately eliminate it (or, in the case of Flaw-Except, you can select it).
I hope that helps!
Jon Denning
PowerScore Test Preparation
Follow me on Twitter at
https://twitter.com/jonmdenning
My LSAT Articles:
http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/author/jon-denning