medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The senator argues that we should increase funding for public schools. However, the senator has been caught lying about their own education. Therefore, we should not increase funding for public schools.
The flawed reasoning in which one of the following is most similar to the flawed reasoning in the argument above?
- The scientist claims that global temperatures are rising, but the scientist's data have been shown to be incomplete. Therefore, we should doubt the claim.
- My opponent says we need higher taxes, but my opponent simply wants to squander our money on wasteful projects. Thus, we should reject higher taxes.
- The witness said the car was red, but the witness was not wearing their glasses. Therefore, the witness's testimony is unreliable.
- The doctor recommends that I quit smoking, but the doctor smokes a pack a day. Therefore, the doctor's recommendation can be dismissed.
- The senator's school-funding proposal has been endorsed by three universities. Therefore, the proposal is sound and we should adopt it.
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 the statements above?
- 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?