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: 8919
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#23176
Complete Question Explanation

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

This argument is flawed because it contains an Internal Contradiction error of reasoning. Specifically, the argument describes "a problem" as consisting of two elements, but the resolution of that problem, described as being a complete solution, addresses only one of those two elements.

This Causal Reasoning argument asserts that when people fail to date revised versions of their wills, they create a two-part problem for the executor: 1) it is uncertain which of a known set of wills is the most recent; and 2) it is uncertain whether the most recent will is contained within the known set. The proposed solution also consists of two parts: 1) dating each new version of the will; and 2) indicating on each new version which previous version it supersedes. The testmakers create a false symmetry in the argument to confuse you into thinking that the two-part solution addresses each of the two problems described. However, the solution addresses only the first problem, determining which of a known set of wills is the most recent. The second problem remains. Another premise in the argument asserts that the proposed solution would prevent the problem from occuring. Since we know that the solution fails to address the second problem, the conclusion, that the proposed solution should be implemented, is based on contradictory premises.

Armed with our prephrase, that the argument contains the Internal Contradiction discussed above, we can head to the answer choices. Answer choice (A) describes this reasoning flaw. The argument treats a partial solution as the complete solution, because it redefines the two-part problem as consisting of only one part. Answer choice (A) is correct.

consider why the remaining answer choices are incorrect. Recall that an incorrect answer choice to a Flaw in the Reasoning question will either fail the Fact Test, because the stated error did not occur in the stimulus, or it will describe something that appeared in the stimulus but did not constitute a reasoning error.

Answer choice (A): As previously discussed, this answer choice is correct choice.

Answer choice (B): This answer choice fails the Fact Test because the argument never discusses the effects that might result from the uncertainty caused by people failing to date new versions of their wills. If you chose answer choice (B), reconsider the identity of the cause and effect described in the stimulus. In the stimulus, people failing to date their wills results in confusion for the executor. That confusion is the "problem" defined by the argument. The argument never discusses the further effects caused by that problem. Accordingly, those further effects are irrelevant to this argument, and it is not a reasoning error to "fail" to discuss something irrelevant to the argument.

Answer choice (C) This answer choice fails the Fact Test, and does so in a tricky, yet common, way. It begins by describing something that occurs in the stimulus, that the proposed solution does not solve the problem. However, this is a feint to lull you into thinking the answer choice will not fail the Fact Test and must be considered on its merits. Don't be fooled! When applying the Fact Test, remember that each component of the answer choice must be something you can prove to yourself is supported by the stimulus. Here, the second clause of the answer choice, that the proposed solution "merely makes someone else responsible for solving the problem," fails the Fact Test. The argument does not describe a shift in responsibility; the problem was and remains that of the executor, not the person drafting the revised will.

Answer choice (D) This answer choice fails the Fact Test, though in a subtle way. The argument concludes that the proposed solution should be implemented in order to resolve a specific problem. It does not claim that this solution would result in a "change for the better" generally speaking. There may be many circumstances in which one would conclude it is "better" that a will revision remain undated, resulting in the exectuor being unable to determine which will is the most recent. That universe of possibilities is not a part of the argument presented in the stimulus. Therefore, failing to consider those posibilities is not a reasoning error.

Answer choice (E) This answer choice fails the Fact Test, because the argument does not mention the unavailability of "a certain action...at the time proposed for that action."
 chian9010
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: Jun 08, 2018
|
#56780
I selected C. I know the problem is on executor. However, doesn't the author shift the responsibility to people who change their wills on their ow?
User avatar
 Dave Killoran
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5850
  • Joined: Mar 25, 2011
|
#60774
chian9010 wrote:I selected C. I know the problem is on executor. However, doesn't the author shift the responsibility to people who change their wills on their ow?
No, the problem with the argument isn't that it makes someone else responsible, but instead that it does not offer an actual full solution to the issue. If it had shifted the problem to someone else but was a full solution, then there wouldn't be a flaw here as that would still solve the problem. Shifting the responsibility isn't an issue here because someone will always need to be responsible at some point when an individual person is making a will.

Thanks!
 lsatbossintraining
  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: Oct 21, 2019
|
#71681
Clever. Here’s why I liked E.

I thought that “certain action” (ie identifying which will the new, amended will supersedes) would be based on info that’s unavailable (since we don’t necessarily know if we have the latest will in hand).

Not my prephrase going in. Actually thought this argument was airtight but didn’t catch the solution’s failing to respond to both problems. Arrived at E after ruling out contenders and losers. Was down to A end E btw but chose E on the feeling that I cracked the code to this question.

What are your thoughts?

Kyle
 Jeremy Press
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1000
  • Joined: Jun 12, 2017
|
#71694
Hi Kyle,

The problem with reading answer choice E the way you have is that the "certain action" you're reading into the answer (the action of identifying the superseded will) is not an "action" that the author of the stimulus argument is "proposing" anything about. In other words, the author never proposes what "should" happen during the identification process. Rather, the author's proposal (the "should" statement in the conclusion of the stimulus argument) is targeted at how a person writing a will should act during the drafting process. Does that clear it up?

I hope this helps!

Jeremy
User avatar
 gmcwest33
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: Jun 28, 2022
|
#95977
Here's why I liked (B).

I was able to narrow it down to choice (B) and choice (A), noticing they both address the problem to some distinguishable extent. The last bit in the conclusion states "... for then there would not be a problem to begin with". Choice (B) discusses containing adverse effects that the problem may cause.

Dating the will and noting which will precedes it will help to contain the problem of the executor becoming confused, but does not PREVENT anything. I followed this logic from the wording I pointed out in the conclusion. However, the choice says "... effects that the problem might cause". If the problem is the executor's confusion, there is no information given on what may. happen further as a result.

I shied away from (A) because it seemed too vague enough to address what I thought I was looking for. Looking back, it addresses everything. Great question!
User avatar
 katehos
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 184
  • Joined: Mar 31, 2022
|
#95989
Hi gmcwest33, thank you for your post!

You're correct as to why (B) is wrong - the stimulus does not discuss an effect of the problem, rather, the stimulus discusses how the problem itself is the confusion about which will is the most recent and whether the will drawn up last has been found!

Ultimately, the issue here is that the solution proposed in the stimulus only prevents one component of the confusion (which will within the known set is the most recent) but does nothing to prevent the second component (being able to tell whether or not the most recent will is within the known set). This lines up with answer choice (A)! While the word choice of (A) might appear vague at first, you're right to see how it does address everything in the stimulus and isn't really vague at all!

I'm glad you were able to figure out the problem and that it was enjoyable!

Great job :)
Kate

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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