Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: The author claims that having too much or too little air in your tires is definitely bad for them, simply because no one has proven that it is safe.

Conclusion: It is reasonable to conclude that improper tire inflation (either too high or too low) causes damage to tire tread.

Reasoning: There is no existing evidence or proof that demonstrates that improper inflation does not harm the tread.

Analysis: This is a textbook 'Appeal to Ignorance' fallacy. The author is attempting to prove a claim is true simply because it hasn't been proven false. In formal logic, a lack of evidence against a position is not the same as positive evidence for that position. You should look for an answer choice that describes this specific error—the shift from 'no proof it is false' to 'it must be true.'

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

10.

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

Correct Answer
D
D captures the appeal to ignorance: the argument dismisses the possibility that the no-harm claim could be true simply because it has not been proven, and infers harm from that absence of proof.
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
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep