easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
To get a driver's license, one must pass a vision test. Since John has a driver's license, he must have passed a vision test.
The argument proceeds by
- reasoning that, because an outcome was attained, a precondition for that outcome was necessarily satisfied.
- treating a sufficient condition as though it were instead merely a necessary one for holding the license.
- offering a causal account of why John personally chose to go out and obtain his driver's license at all.
- extending John's single particular case into a sweeping general rule covering all licensed drivers everywhere.
- establishing that passing a vision test, entirely by itself, is enough to guarantee one a driver's license.
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