Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Because something happened the last two times, it is predicted to happen again this time.

Conclusion: Browning will likely have more rain in September than in July this year.

Reasoning: In the two years immediately preceding this one, September was rainier than July in Browning.

Analysis: The argument falls into the trap of overgeneralizing from a very small sample size. Two years of weather data is hardly enough to establish a reliable long-term pattern or a 'probability' for the current year. The speaker treats a brief coincidence as if it were a stable trend. Look for an answer choice that highlights the insufficiency of the evidence or the danger of predicting future events based solely on a limited number of past instances.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

1.

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

Correct Answer
B
It criticizes the argument for inferring what will happen this year from only two prior instances. Two data points are too few to establish a stable trend, so the argument overgeneralizes from a very limited sample.
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