easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A survey of three hundred residents of the Westside neighborhood found that 75 percent preferred the new park design over the old one. Therefore, the majority of the city's residents likely prefer the new park design.
The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it
- treats the views collected within a single neighborhood as though they reliably reflect the views of the city as a whole
- presumes, without warrant, that resident preference is the only consideration that ought to guide municipal urban-planning decisions
- confuses a percentage drawn from the surveyed sample with a precise absolute count of how many residents were polled
- neglects to spell out the concrete ways in which the new park design departs from the old design it replaced
- overlooks the possibility that no city resident could ever reasonably prefer one park design to another
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