Flaw Arguments

Question 1

How to view every argument

Answer 1

What’s the point?
How’s it supported?
What’s wrong with that?

Question 2

Two Mantras of Finding Flaws

Answer 2

“The author fails to consider that…”

(The author is forgetting to think about something that she needs to think about)

“The author takes for granted that …”

(The author is assuming some sort of connection that doesn’t actually exist)

Question 3

Three Types of Argument Flaws

Answer 3

“A piece =/= the puzzle”
“Apples =/= Oranges”
“1 + 1 =/= 3”

Question 4

A Piece =/= the puzzle

Answer 4

Overreach in trying to justify a conclusion, using supporting evidence that may turn out to be just one part of a bigger picture

Arguments in which the author falsely overvalues one consideration at the expense of other considerations

Question 5

Three Subtypes of A Piece =/= the puzzle

Answer 5

Overvalue a trait
Overvalues an opinion
Overvalues a sample set

Question 6

Overvalues a Trait

Answer 6

To overvalue a trait is to put too much emphasis on one particular characteristic or one particular “clue” in reaching a conclusion
No matter how convincing that “clue” is, unless it guarantees the outcome the author presents, it is flawed

Question 7

Primary Drivers

Answer 7

Premises used in arguments that indicate importance in the argument, but do not prove it to be true

Every time a primary driver is used to justify a conclusion, you know that characteristic, while it may be important, is not enough to prove the author’s point

Question 8

Overvalues an Opinion

Answer 8

The truth is never the truth because someone said it. It is only the truth because it is the truth

An opinion also doesn’t prove an argument false!

Question 9

Uses a Small Sample Set

Answer 9

Samples must be representative of population and unbiased

Question 10

Puzzle =/= Piece: Flipside

Answer 10

Sometimes the LSAT flips the arguments on us

Ex: “The new Honda is 70% lighter than the average automobile. It must be true that this Honda’s engine is lighter than average”

This flips the argument but it’s still flawed. Just because it’s weight is lighter doesn’t mean that every single object in the car has reduced weight.

Question 11

Apple =/= Oranges

Answer 11

A=/=O arguments treat two things as if they are the same or similar enough when they are clearly not

Question 12

There are three type of A=/=O

Answer 12

The author falsely equates subject matter
The author falsely equates a characteristic
The author falsely equates a relationship

Question 13

Falsely Equates Subject Matter

Answer 13

When we are looking for a flaw we can look for differences in subject matter between the support and the conclusion

Question 14

Unfamiliar Subjects, Similar Subjects

Answer 14

The average salary at the company is well over $17K, therefore most employees must make over $17K”

What if the CEO makes $100K and most the employees make only $1000? This will drive the average of the salaries down

The argument wrongly equates the salaries

Question 15

Falsely Equates Characteristic

Answer 15

Relating characteristic about the subject matter

Question 16

Falsely Equates a Relationship

Answer 16

Falsely assumes that the relationship between elements mentioned in the premise equates to that mentioned in the conclusion

“Most residents of Hermosa Beach dine at Tom’s Diner. Therefore, most of the customer’s in Tom’s diner must be residents of Hermosa Beach”

“Gerald joined that new exercise class and it helped him get in shape. That’s probably how Jill also got in great shape”

Question 17

Enough, but not Necessary

Answer 17

(Mistaking Sufficient For Necessary)

Assuming that because something is enough to get a result, that’s it’s necessary if you want that result

“Coffee helps one stay awake, therefore if you want to stay awake you have to drink coffee”

Question 18

1+1=/=3

Answer 18

Author brings together two pieces of information or two ideas that conclude something that those components don’t warrant

“Sharon is the tallest in her family. John is the shortest in his family. Therefore, Sharon must be taller than John”

Question 19

A key way to spot flaws is

Answer 19

to look for changes in subject matter, characteristics, or relationships

Question 20

Correlation and Causation

Answer 20

Correlation can strengthen arguments and weaken arguments but can never prove arguments. Only causation proves causation.

Question 21

Necessary, but not enough

Answer 21

(Mistaking Necessary to be Sufficient)

Arguments that give characteristics that are necessary for the conclusion but not enough to reach it

“In order to watch the soccer match one must have a TV. Ted has a TV, so therefore he will be able to watch the soccer match”
What if he doesn’t have electricity? What if he doesn’t have the channel?