easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A nutritionist states: 'To lose weight, one must either reduce caloric intake or increase physical activity. Since John has increased his physical activity, he will certainly lose weight.'
The reasoning is flawed because it
- Treats a step that is merely required for weight loss as though carrying it out were enough to bring weight loss about.
- Assumes without any warrant that caloric intake and physical activity are the only two factors that affect weight loss.
- Overlooks that many people raise their activity level substantially yet still, for various reasons, fail to lose weight.
- Mistakes a mere observed correlation between increased activity and weight loss for a genuine cause-and-effect relationship.
- Presumes that increasing one's physical activity is simply impossible without also reducing one's daily caloric intake.
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