medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
History Professor: My critics argue that my latest book contains several factual errors. However, these critics are all members of a rival school of thought that has long been obsessed with discrediting my research. Therefore, their claims can be safely ignored.
The professor's argument is most similar in its flaw to which of the following?
- A senator brushes aside an unfavorable emissions report solely because the analysts who produced it were paid by advocacy groups opposed to the industry.
- A physician disregards a patient's confident self-diagnosis on the sole ground that the patient lacks any formal medical training or relevant clinical experience.
- A judge steps aside from presiding over a trial because she happens to be a close personal friend of the defendant and his immediate family members.
- A researcher rejects a newly proposed theory because it squarely conflicts with several well-established physical laws that decades of experiments have confirmed.
- A reviewer praises a recent study chiefly because its authors are widely respected senior figures whose past work the field has long admired and cited.
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