easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
No one has ever been able to prove that this specific herbal tea does not improve memory. Thus, we can conclude that the tea is effective at boosting cognitive function.
The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it:
- treats the failure to disprove a claim as if it amounted to positive support for that claim
- mistakes a condition merely necessary for sound health for one that is by itself fully sufficient
- supposes that every herbal tea on the market affects the human brain in one and the same way
- calls into open question the basic competence of the scientists who actually study human memory
- assumes that a substance shown to carry no proven harm must for that reason confer some benefit
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