#25 - When interviewing job candidates, personnel managers not only evaluate a candidate’s work

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

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

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[lsathelpppp]

Can someone please explain why the correct answer is B?

[Dana D]

Hey lsathelpppp,

The argument here is that managers shouldn't ask candidates about their hobbies because the candidate might be more concerned with play than work. Each incorrect answer choice will show a flaw in this line of thinking by providing a reason why managers should ask about hobbies. Answer choices (A,C,D, and E) do this.

Answer choice (B) doesn't provide reasoning why managers might want to ask about hobbies, it's something the argument overlooks, however it does not address the flaw in the argument.

Hope that helps!

[Let'sMasterLsat]

Hi,

The hardest and most confusing part of this test for me was that the question stem "The argument is flawed because it overlooks each of the following possibilities EXCEPT", seemed so rare on the Flaw category; and I spent a lot of time figuring out what is the task - I also ended up choosing a wrong answer-.
"But my question here is, can we look at this type of flaw question as a strengthening/weakening question"? Can I look at the wrong answer choices as the ones that weaken the conclusion, and the correct answer choice as either something irrelevant or strengthen the conclusion? Please correct me if I am wrong, unless this way of looking at it makes it more straight forward for completing the task. Thanks!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi Let'sMasterLsat!

That's a good question, as I can see your reasoning in wanting to look at the question that way. However, ultimately, I would try to keep this in the flaw-except category, rather than considering it a strengthen/weaken question. It seems true that the four incorrect answer choices would weaken the conclusion of the stimulus, but they are more broadly identifying flaws with the given reasoning. However, the correct answer choice on this type of question is not necessarily something that strengthens/weakens but rather something that is not a flaw with the argument.

It's also worth keeping this separate as a category because you will encounter strengthen-except and weaken-except questions. On strengthen-except questions, the correct answer choice will either do nothing or may weaken the argument. On weaken-except questions, the correct answer choice will either do nothing or may strengthen the argument.

[drewwellnitz]

I don't understand how B is correct. Despite answer choice B not being able to "provide reasoning why managers might want to ask about hobbies", it is still overlooked. The question stem asks which is not overlooked, yet every answer choice was overlooked. Additionally, you mention "however it does not address the flaw in the argument". What is the specific flaw in this argument? Thank you so much for any help in advance!

[Jeff Wren]

Hi drew,

Let's start by taking a closer look at the question stem.

"The argument is flawed because it overlooks each of the following possibilities EXCEPT" (my emphasis).

The is a Flaw EXCEPT question, which is very uncommon. Regular Flaw questions are very common, but Flaw EXCEPT questions are not.

In a regular Flaw question, the correct answer will describe the flaw in the argument. Here, the four incorrect answers describes flaws in the argument, while the correct answer does not describe a flaw in the argument. You asked about the specific flaw in this argument, but there are actually multiple flaws in this argument, and each wrong answer addresses one of the flaws in this argument.

The argument recommends not asking about candidates' hobbies, but there could be many reasons why asking about candidates' hobbies is actually a good idea which the argument overlooks.

For each of the wrong answers, it's not simply that these answers describe something that the argument overlooks; it's that the answer describes something that the argument should not have overlooked (in this case, a benefit or positive of asking about candidates' hobbies), which makes the argument flawed.

In other words, arguments overlook plenty of things that are completely irrelevant to their argument, but overlooking those things isn't a flaw. For something overlooked to be a flaw, it needs to be something that is relevant to the argument and would need to be addressed.

While B does describe something that the argument overlooked, this is not something that the argument needed to consider as a possible reason for asking about candidates' hobbies and so overlooking this is not a flaw.