easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Professor Hartley is an expert on medieval history. She recently argued that the current minimum wage is too low. Given her exceptional intellect and scholarly credentials, her argument deserves serious consideration.
The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it
- Rests its case on the standing of an authority whose field of mastery has no bearing on the question at hand.
- Supposes that genuine brilliance in one academic discipline secures expert competence in every other discipline.
- Does not actually reproduce the particular reasons Hartley herself gives for her view on the minimum wage.
- Treats a contested question of economic policy as though it were a settled matter of established historical fact.
- Implies that no person lacking formal scholarly credentials could ever say anything worthwhile about wages.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ