The passage provides the strongest support for inferring that Lessing holds which one of the following views?
Brett-Standeron September 9, 2019
Example 4
Hello,
I understand that the security guard may have a bias, but I am confused as why this is the predominate method of flawed logic in this question. When I read the question, the flawed logic seemed to be derived from the fact that the thieves lacked A and B (above or at ground level) to conclude C, below ground. This conclusion fails to factor in that maybe the thieves did not enter at all (E.g, someone working at the museum walked out with the paintings).
Using this, I read A, which I selected as correct. A implores the same flaw in logic, a lack of condition A and B (first in both accuracy and form) to conclude C (that a third condition must exist). This seems to be the same flaw as my original deviation from the question stem. Thanks!
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
In case anyone also had this problem, I think i figured it out. Both A and B implore the same logic, but B has the bias while A does not. Atleast thats what is seems.
maonuoon November 13, 2019
I am soooo confused by Mehran's explanation for this answer choice C for Example 4 could someone please clarify?? How did he jump to 200 women??
Skylaron May 2, 2020
@maonuo, happy to help!
First of all, please note that Mehran came up with these numbers to more clearly illustrate his explanation. The point here is that you are in no way expected to look at only the LSAT question and somehow come up with the number 200.
Mehran starts out by imagining that we have 50 men married to 50 women in the census. To keep this consistent with the answer choice, the percentage of men who are married must be higher than the percentage of women who are married. So, Mehran chooses to assign the married men as making up 50% of all men and the married women as making up 25% of all women. But, if the 50 married men make up 50% (AKA half) of all men, that must mean that the total population of married and unmarried men combined is 100 men (think "50 is 50% of what"). Turning to the women, we see that if the 50 married women only made up 25% of all women, the total population of married and unmarried women is 200 (think "50 is 25% of what"). This shows that the percentage of men who are married being higher than the percentage of women who are married does not mean that there must be a higher number of men than women overall. So, this shows us that (C) is flawed, albeit differently than how the passage is flawed.
Does that make sense? Please let us know if you have any other questions!
AustenFisheron August 12, 2020
I understand that bias is one of the logical fallacies (I missed that one), but isn't failure to eliminate alternatives another one? They eliminated the ground levels and the underground levels, but they didn't eliminate thieves coming in from above. And doesn't answer D adhere to that flaw of failure to eliminate alternatives? How does one pick which fallacy to choose between?
Deajahon July 25, 2022
the passage says that they did not come in at or above the ground floor. that eliminates the ground floor and everything above it.
