medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The average household income in Greenville has risen steadily for the past five years. Therefore, most families in Greenville are better off financially than they were five years ago.
The argument's reasoning is questionable because it
- Infers that a majority of individuals gained simply because the group's mean figure went up.
- Disregards how steadily rising inflation may have quietly eroded the real purchasing power of these incomes.
- Assumes that a family's financial well-being is captured wholly by its measured household income figure.
- Uses observed past income trends to forecast what will happen to those same incomes in the years ahead.
- Presumes that not one family anywhere in Greenville saw any decline whatsoever in its income.
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