June 2017 LSAT Section 3 Question 23

If a piece of legislation is the result of negotiation and compromise between competing interest groups, it will not ...

Karen-Norris on February 21, 2022

Why not A (Circular Logic)

Ok, I read the Key Takeaway that in an Errors in Reasoning question that features conditional logic, we should look for a conditional reasoning error unless we're convinced the conditional logic isn't erroneous. I'm hanging my hat on that because when I read the answer explanation: "It concludes that a certain condition (compromise) is necessary for a result (unhappiness) merely from the claim that the condition (again, compromise) leads to that result (unhappiness)." It sure sounds like circular logic to me.

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on March 5, 2022

Hi Karen

This argument is flawed because it confuses a sufficient condition for a necessary one. A circular argument would be one in which the conclusion was not different from one of the premises (E.g. Since Joel is the best candidate for president, Joel would make the best president out of all the candidates) however, the conclusion here is a misstatement of the premise.

Our premise is that If negotiated then unhappy. Our conclusion is that since unhappy, negotiated. This reverses the flow of logic, which is not allowed.