Free LSAT Practice Question

Question 1 of 1
ID: LSAT-LR-112
Section: Logical Reasoning
Topic: Flaw in the Reasoning
Difficulty level: Hard

Practice Mode: Single selected Question » Back to Overview

Agronomist: The seed merchant's advice is that a drill should be calibrated over a hundred metres rather than over ten, on the ground that a longer run averages out the drill's irregularities. But the merchant sells the drills, and would have every reason to recommend a method that flatters them. So the hundred-metre run tells a grower nothing he can rely on.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the agronomist's reasoning?

AIt supposes that a recommendation loses whatever support the reason given for it may have carried, once an interest of the person recommending it has been pointed out.

BIt does not compare hundred-metre and ten-metre calibration across enough drills, and enough makes of drill, to show which of the two more often leaves a grower sowing at the rate he set.

CIt concludes that a method tells a grower nothing he can rely on from the unsoundness of the case made for it, when a method may be sound though its case is not.

DIt appears to answer the merchant with a rival account of what a longer run measures, then treats it as the better of the two on bare plausibility.

EIt treats a method's popularity among growers as evidence of soundness, when wide practice may measure nothing.

» Quit