medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Every student who receives a scholarship must maintain a grade point average of at least 3.5. Taylor maintains a grade point average of 3.8. Therefore, Taylor must be receiving a scholarship.
The reasoning above is flawed because it:
- Mistakes a requirement for receiving a scholarship for something that by itself secures one.
- Confuses the mere sequence of two events with one event's causing the other.
- Neglects the possibility that Taylor's grade point average was lower in earlier semesters.
- Takes for granted, without warrant, that Taylor is in fact a student.
- Assumes that no student could ever exceed the minimum grade point average the rule sets.
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?