Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

All savings accounts are interest-bearing accounts. The interest from some interest-bearing accounts is tax-free, so there must be some savings accounts that have taxfree interest. Which one of the following arguments is flawed in a way most similar to the way in which the passage is flawed? (A) All artists are intellectuals. Some great photographers are artists. Therefore, some great photographers must be intellectuals. (B) All great photographers are artists. All artists are intellectuals. Therefore, some great photographers must be intellectuals. (C) All great photographers are artists. Some artists are intellectuals. Therefore, some great photographers are intellectuals. (D) All great photographers are artists. Some great photographers are intellectuals. Therefore, some artists must be intellectuals. (E) All great photographers are artists. No artists are intellectuals. Therefore, some great photographers must not be intellectuals.

Short Answer

Expert verified
(A) All artists are intellectuals. Some great photographers are artists. Therefore, some great photographers must be intellectuals.

Step by step solution

01

Identify the Flaw in the Original Argument

The original argument is: 1. All savings accounts are interest-bearing accounts. 2. Some interest-bearing accounts have tax-free interest. 3. Therefore, some savings accounts must have tax-free interest. The flaw here is that the argument assumes that because some interest-bearing accounts are tax-free, this attribute must apply to savings accounts as well, without specific evidence supporting that conclusion.
02

Analyze Each Option

Now, let's look at each option to identify a similarly flawed argument: (A) All artists are intellectuals. Some great photographers are artists. Therefore, some great photographers must be intellectuals. (B) All great photographers are artists. All artists are intellectuals. Therefore, some great photographers must be intellectuals. (C) All great photographers are artists. Some artists are intellectuals. Therefore, some great photographers are intellectuals. (D) All great photographers are artists. Some great photographers are intellectuals. Therefore, some artists must be intellectuals. (E) All great photographers are artists. No artists are intellectuals. Therefore, some great photographers must not be intellectuals.
03

Match the Flaw

The original argument's flaw is that it incorrectly transfers a property from a broader category (interest-bearing accounts) to a sub-category (savings accounts) without direct evidence. - (A) has the same logical structure: it assumes that a subset (great photographers) must also hold a property of the larger set (artists being intellectuals) without a necessary conclusion. - (B) is logically valid because it follows directly. - (C) does not provide a necessary conclusion. - (D) does not follow a necessary conclusion from the premises. - (E) does not follow a necessary conclusion and presents a contradiction.
04

Select the Correct Option

(A) has the same type of flaw as the original passage. It assumes that, because all artists are intellectuals and some great photographers are artists, some great photographers must be intellectuals without guaranteeing the connection. Similarly, in the original argument, the assumption about savings accounts having tax-free interest is made without evidence.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Logical Reasoning
Logical reasoning is a critical skill tested on the LSAT, and it involves examining and evaluating arguments. When you encounter a logical reasoning question, you need to determine the structure of the argument and evaluate the relationship between its premises and conclusion.
Logical reasoning requires recognizing whether the conclusions logically follow from the premises. Think of it like solving a puzzle - you're provided with pieces (the premises), and your job is to see if they fit together to create a complete picture (the conclusion).
  • The original exercise presents a scenario: All savings accounts are interest-bearing accounts. Some interest-bearing accounts offer tax-free interest, leading to the conclusion that some savings accounts must offer tax-free interest.
  • The task is to determine if this conclusion logically follows based on the given premises.
Recognizing patterns and inconsistencies is crucial. By practicing logical reasoning questions, you'll improve your ability to see through complex arguments and identify gaps or flaws.
Argument Evaluation
Argument evaluation is the process of critically examining an argument to assess its strength and validity. In argument evaluation, you seek to answer questions like: Is the argument sound? Do the premises support the conclusion? Are there hidden assumptions?
This exercise demonstrates a flawed argument that relies on a problematic assumption. It assumes that because some interest-bearing accounts are tax-free, some savings accounts must also be tax-free without providing evidence.
  • The key in evaluating arguments is identifying if there are assumptions not explicitly stated that weaken the argument's integrity.
  • The original argument also lacks direct evidence linking the premises to the conclusion, making the reasoning flawed.
By scrutinizing arguments, you can discern between well-supported conclusions and those that jump to unwarranted conclusions.
Logical Flaws
Logical flaws, or fallacies, occur when there are errors in reasoning. Learning to spot these flaws helps in identifying weak arguments.
The original exercise contains a logical flaw where properties of a larger group are incorrectly attributed to a subset without justification. In this case, it assumes all savings accounts must have tax-free interest simply because some interest-bearing accounts do.
Recognizing logical flaws can be like identifying mistakes in a math equation. A correct diagnosis can prevent misunderstandings. Common logical flaws include:
  • Hasty generalization – jumping to a conclusion based on limited evidence.
  • False cause – assuming one event causes another just because they’re temporally sequential.
  • Circular reasoning – when the conclusion is included in the premises.
Understanding these flaws allows for better argumentation and critical evaluation of claims you encounter.
Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning is about drawing specific conclusions based on general premises that are assumed to be true. If the premises are accurate and the reasoning is valid, the conclusion must also be true.
A classic example of deductive reasoning is: "All humans are mortal. Socrates is a human. Therefore, Socrates is mortal."
In deductive reasoning, the logic flows from a general statement to a specific conclusion. The exercise in focus mistakenly uses deductive reasoning by assuming a conclusion that doesn’t logically follow.
  • In a valid deductive argument, it’s impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
  • A flaw in reasoning may mean that even if the premises are true, the conclusion isn't guaranteed.
Judging the validity of deductive arguments helps develop rigorous logical thinking important for the LSAT and beyond.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

A well-known sports figure found that combining publicity tours with playing tours led to problems, so she stopped combining the two. She no longer allows bookstore appearances and playing in competition to occur in the same city within the same trip. This week she is traveling to London to play in a major competition, so during her stay in London she will not be making any publicity appearances at any bookstore in London. Which one of the following most closely parallels the reasoning used in the passage? (A) Wherever there is an Acme Bugkiller, many wasps are killed. The \(\mathrm{Z}\) family garden has an Acme Bugkiller, so any wasps remaining in the garden will soon be killed. (B) The only times that the hospital's emergency room staff attends to relatively less serious emergencies are times when there is no critical emergency to attend to. On Monday night the emergency room staff attended to a series of fairly minor emergencies, so there must not have been any critical emergencies to take care of at the time. (C) Tomato plants require hot summers to thrive. Farms in the cool summers of country \(Y\) probably do not have thriving tomato plants. (D) Higher grades lead to better job opportunities. and studying leads to higher grades. Therefore, studying will lead to better job opportunities. (E) Butter knives are not sharp. \(Q\) was not murdered with a sharp blade, so suspect \(X\) 's butter knife may have been the murder weapon.

Alice: Quotas on automobile imports to the United States should be eliminated. Then domestic producers would have to compete directly with Japanese manufacturers and would be forced to produce higher-quality cars. Such competition would be good for consumers. David: You fail to realize, Alice, that quotas on automobile imports are pervasive worldwide. Since Germany, Britain, and France have quotas, so should the United States. Which one of the following most accurately characterizes David's response to Alice's statement? (A) David falsely accuses Alice of contradicting herself. (B) David unfairly directs his argument against Alice personally. (C) David uncovers a hidden assumption underlying Alice's position. (D) David takes a position that is similar to the one Alice has taken. (E) David fails to address the reasons Alice cites in favor of her conclusion.

The United States has never been a great international trader. It found most of its raw materials and customers for finished products within its own borders. The terrible consequences of this situation have become apparent, as this country now owes the largest foreign debt in the world and is a playground for wealthy foreign investors. The moral is clear: a country can no more live without foreign trade than a dog can live by eating its own tail. In order to advance her point of view, the author does each of the following EXCEPT (A) draw on an analogy (B) appeal to historical fact (C) identify a cause and an effect (D) suggest a cause of the current economic situation (E) question the ethical basis of an economic situation

Nuclear fusion is a process whereby the nuclei of atoms are jouned, or "tused," and in which energy is released. One of the by-products of fusion is helium \(-4\) gas. A recent fusion experiment was conducted using "heavy" water contained in a sealed flask. The flask was, in turn, contained in an air- filled chamber designed to eliminate extraneous vibration. After the experiment, a measurable amount of helium-4 gas was found in the air of the chamber. The experimenters cited this evidence in support of their conclusion that fusion had been achieved. Which one of the following, if true, would cast doubt on the experimenters' conclusion? (A) Helium-4 was not the only gas found in the experiment chamber. (B) When fusion is achieved, it normally produces several by-products, including tritium and gamma rays. (C) The amount of helium-4 found in the chamber's air did not exceed the amount of helium-4 that is found in ordinary air. (D) Helium-4 gas rapidly breaks down, forming ordinary helium gas after a few hours. (E) Nuclear fusion reactions are characterized by the release of large amounts of heat.

Normal full-term babies are all born with certain instinctive reflexes that disappear by the age of two months. Because this three-month-old baby exhibits these reflexes, this baby is not a normal full-term baby. Which one of the following has a logical structure most like that of the argument above? (A) Because carbon dioxide tums limewater milky and this gas is oxygen, it will not turn limewater milky. (B) Because no ape can talk and Suzy is an ape, Suzy cannot talk. (C) Because humans are social animals and Henry is sociable, Henry is normal. (D) Because opossums have abdominal pouches and this animal lacks any such pouch, this animal is not an opossum. (E) Because some types of trees shed their leaves annually and this tree has not shed its leaves, it is not normal.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on English Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free