Flawed ReasoningDiff: Medium

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: A commentator argues that the 1973 oil crisis was a fake shortage cooked up by oil companies to get rich, simply because those companies made a lot of money right after it happened.

Conclusion: The 1973 oil crisis was caused by a conspiracy between oil companies and producing nations to limit supply for profit, rather than a genuine shortage.

Reasoning: Following the 1973 crisis, both international oil companies and oil-producing countries saw a massive increase in their profits and incomes.

Analysis: The argument suffers from a classic 'correlation vs. causation' flaw, specifically the 'after this, therefore because of this' variety. The commentator assumes that because oil entities profited from the crisis, they must have orchestrated it. However, a genuine shortage would also lead to higher prices and increased profits. Look for an answer that points out the evidence provided is just as consistent with a real shortage as it is with a conspiracy.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

13.

The reasoning in the commentator's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

Correct Answer
A
It points out the core flaw: the argument infers collusion (cause) from the mere fact that the parties benefited (effect), ignoring that they could have profited without causing the crisis.
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