Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: A magazine editor is pointing out mistakes on TV, but because she makes those same mistakes herself, we should ignore her criticisms.

Conclusion: The magazine editor's judgments regarding spelling and grammar errors should not be trusted.

Reasoning: The editor has made the same types of spelling and grammar mistakes in her own magazine that she is criticizing in others.

Analysis: This is a classic 'ad hominem' or 'tu quoque' fallacy, where the author attacks the person's character or consistency rather than the substance of their argument. It’s the logical equivalent of saying a doctor’s advice to stop smoking is wrong just because the doctor smokes. While the editor might be a hypocrite, her hypocrisy doesn't actually prove her observations about the TV program are incorrect. Look for an answer where a person's own failings are used to dismiss their valid observations.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

1.

The flawed reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following?

Correct Answer
B
B mirrors the tu quoque flaw: it rejects the news program’s judgment that the company’s hiring is unfair because the program allegedly engages in the same unfair practice. That’s the same structure as the stimulus—dismissing a criticism due to the critic’s similar fault.
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