medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A historian argues that because a particular medieval manuscript contains several grammatical errors, the scribe who produced it must have been poorly trained.
The historian's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism because it fails to consider that
- the grammatical errors may have already existed in the source text the scribe was faithfully copying
- the scribe may have been highly skilled in some other craft, such as the careful illumination of manuscripts
- various other manuscripts produced during the very same period also contain comparable grammatical errors
- this single manuscript is the only piece of work by that particular scribe that is now known to survive
- no scribe working anywhere in that era could possibly have avoided making at least some grammatical errors
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