medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Seven months ago, Ian's photos took up 6% of his computer memory. Today, they take up only 4%. Therefore, Ian must have deleted some photos.
Which of the following most accurately identifies a flaw in the argument's reasoning?
- It overlooks that a growing total storage capacity could shrink the photos' share even if no photos were removed.
- It mistakes a genuine drop in the sheer number of stored photos for a decline in the resolution of those photos.
- It generalizes about the state of Ian's whole photo library from an unrepresentative slice of his stored files.
- It assumes, without any warrant, that Ian now uses his computer far more often than he did seven months ago.
- It treats a mere drop in the stored percentage as conclusive proof that Ian permanently destroyed every deleted file.
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