Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Someone decides that because a person doesn't act like a friend, they must be an enemy.

Conclusion: Devan is the speaker's enemy.

Reasoning: Devan has failed to meet any of the basic criteria for friendship, such as being kind, helpful, or providing companionship.

Analysis: This argument suffers from a classic 'false dilemma' or 'false dichotomy' flaw. It assumes that 'friend' and 'enemy' are the only two possible categories for a person, ignoring the vast middle ground of acquaintances, strangers, or people we simply don't like. To find a parallel flaw, look for an answer choice that takes two non-exhaustive options and assumes that failing to be one automatically makes you the other. It's a bit like saying if you aren't a professional chef, you must be a terrible cook—there is plenty of room in between.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

22.

Which one of the following exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to the flawed reasoning exhibited in the argument above?

Correct Answer
C
It moves from “no hostile reviews” (absence of negative) to “all loved it” (strong positive). That parallels inferring Enemy from not meeting Friend criteria: turning not-negative into positive or not-friend into enemy.
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