medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning

Which one of the following is the most accurate assessment of the reasoning in the nutritionist's argument?

1. The reasoning is sound, because the presence of a result that requires a given condition guarantees that the condition was met.
2. The reasoning is flawed, because it treats a condition merely required for an outcome as though it were enough to produce that outcome.
3. The reasoning is flawed, because from the fact that a result obtains it infers, without warrant, that a particular prerequisite was satisfied.
4. The reasoning is flawed, because it concludes that one thing caused another simply because the two coincided in time.
5. The reasoning is flawed, because it relies on the nutritionist's authority rather than on any actual evidence about Julian.

Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →