Flawed ReasoningDiff: Hardest
Logic Breakdown
Passage Summary: The author argues that because you have to understand computer design to be a scientist and to appreciate new tech, then only the people who appreciate the tech are the scientists.
Conclusion: Only those who appreciate technological advances are computer scientists.
Reasoning: Computer scientists are a subset of those who understand computer architecture, and those who understand architecture are a subset of those who appreciate technological advances.
Analysis: This argument is a textbook example of a 'mistaken reversal' in formal logic. The premises establish a chain: being a Computer Scientist requires Understanding Architecture, which in turn is required to Appreciate Advances (CS -> Arch -> Appreciate). The conclusion then incorrectly flips this chain to claim that Appreciating Advances is the requirement for being a Computer Scientist. You should look for an answer choice that identifies this confusion between a necessary condition and a sufficient condition. It treats a result of being a computer scientist as if it were the defining requirement for being one.
Conclusion: Only those who appreciate technological advances are computer scientists.
Reasoning: Computer scientists are a subset of those who understand computer architecture, and those who understand architecture are a subset of those who appreciate technological advances.
Analysis: This argument is a textbook example of a 'mistaken reversal' in formal logic. The premises establish a chain: being a Computer Scientist requires Understanding Architecture, which in turn is required to Appreciate Advances (CS -> Arch -> Appreciate). The conclusion then incorrectly flips this chain to claim that Appreciating Advances is the requirement for being a Computer Scientist. You should look for an answer choice that identifies this confusion between a necessary condition and a sufficient condition. It treats a result of being a computer scientist as if it were the defining requirement for being one.
Passage Stimulus
Passage Redacted
Unlock Full Passage23.Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the reasoning in the argument?
Correct Answer
B
Correct. The argument treats appreciating advances as necessary for being a computer scientist (CS -> A), even though the premises only establish it as sufficient (A -> CS). This ignores the possibility that some computer scientists may not appreciate those advances.
Upgrade Your Prep
Ready to go beyond free explanations?
LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.
Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal