easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The average tenure of employees at a large technology company has risen by two years over the past decade. We may conclude that most of the company's employees have now been there longer than they had been a decade ago.
Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the argument's reasoning?
- It slides from a statistic that characterizes a group as a whole to a claim about how the majority of its individual members fared
- It takes for granted that the company has hired no new employees at any point during the past ten years of its operation
- It disregards the possibility that overall employee satisfaction has fallen even as average tenures across the company have lengthened
- It neglects to state precisely how many additional years the company's average employee tenure has risen over the decade
- It assumes that a rising average tenure would be impossible unless every single employee's individual tenure had increased
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