Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Ray thinks Cynthia is mistaken about a pothole causing her trunk to pop because the trunk has popped for other reasons in the past.

Conclusion: Cynthia is wrong to believe that hitting a pothole caused her car's trunk to pop open.

Reasoning: The trunk has popped open on several other occasions when the car did not hit any potholes.

Analysis: Ray's logic is quite flawed because he assumes that if an event can happen without a certain cause, then that cause can never be the culprit. Just because a trunk *can* pop due to a faulty latch or a ghost doesn't mean it *didn't* pop this time because of a pothole. You should look for an answer that points out Ray's failure to consider that a single effect can have multiple different causes.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

4.

The reasoning in Ray's argument is most vulnerable to criticism in that the argument

Correct Answer
D
D captures the flaw: the argument ignores that one type of event can have many causes. Even if the trunk has popped open without potholes before, a pothole still could have caused it this time.
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