Get 10-20% OFF All
Invite a Friend
Fee Waiver Scholarship
LSAT Test Dates
Free LSAT Resources
LSAT Message Board
February 1995 LSAT
The commissioner has announced that Judge Khalid, who was on the seven–member panel appointed to resolve the Amlec la...
on September 28, 2019
Why is D correct? Why is E incorrect?
Create a free account to read and take part in
Already have an account?
on September 29, 2019
This is a classic whole-to-part flaw. The argument tells us that because a seven-member panel is fair and objective, any member of this panel must be fair and objective.
Let's look at (D) and (E)
(D) tells us that a real estate agent must have sold fewer houses this year because her company as a whole sold fewer house. This is a similar whole-to-part flaw that we see in the stimulus, just because the real estate agency as a whole sold fewer houses does not mean that each agent sold fewer houses, perhaps a few agents saw a significant drop in sales and some agents sold the same or higher number of houses.
(E) tells us that members of a historical society unanimously support designating a bank as a historical landmark. George is a member, thus he must support it. (E) appears attractive because of its whole-to-part component, but (E) is actually a valid argument. Notice that the members UNANIMOUSLY support the bank, this tells us that every single member of the society supports it, this relationship is equivalent to:
Member -> support
If A then B
Since George is a member (A is true), we can infer that he supports it (B is true).
Let me know if this makes sense and if you have any further questions.