hard · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Every prize-winning novel published by Harrow Press last decade was edited by either Delia Nkomo or Samuel Ortiz. Nkomo has since retired from editing entirely. So any prize-winning novel that Harrow Press publishes this decade must have been edited by Ortiz.
The argument's reasoning is flawed because it
- infers that Ortiz personally caused each novel he edited last decade to win its prize
- presumes that Ortiz and Nkomo were the only editors Harrow Press employed last decade
- overlooks that Harrow Press may have published prize winners edited by no one on staff
- assumes that last decade's editor pattern will still govern this decade's prize winners
- takes for granted that Ortiz himself has not also retired or stopped editing for the press
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- 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?
- 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
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?