Council member: I recommend that the abandoned shoe factory be used

CDE are irrelevant because of providing assertions which are out of the scope.
A and B seems closer, If you go closer then A is claiming the opposite of council member statement.
So B is the correct one.

Posted from my mobile device

Dear Experts,

Greetings of the day.

I am stuck on this question and am confused between options A and B. I am sure that options C, D, and E are irrelevant because of providing assertions that are out of the scope. However, I am unable to choose between options A and B.

I would request you to provide me the exact reasoning by which I can pick the correct option and why option A is incorrect.

Your help will be appreciative and many thanks in advance.

Hello, RahulHGGmat. You have to be careful in your evaluation of just what the answer choices are saying, even if this is an LSAT question that is not likely to show up in similar form on the GMAT™. How about we look at the two choices in question?


Notice that the passage states the exact opposite: they have provided no evidence of this. Thus, the shoe factory would be a better shelter site. The conclusion marker, thus, indicates that because of this lack of evidence, the opposite point of view, the one advocated by the council member, must be correct. Because the word at the end of the answer choice cannot be negotiated with, we have to abandon this one altogether.


There is nothing to argue against here. The council member accepts his or her own claim by pointing out a flaw in another proposal. (Never mind the lack of evidence on the part of the council member.) Calling one view false does not necessarily legitimize an opposing view. Since every word fits here, this should be our answer.

I hope that helps. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

A reminder to myself to check all of the choices!!!

A is a trap.

Council member: I recommend that the abandoned shoe factory be used as a municipal emergency shelter. Some council members assert that the courthouse would be a better shelter site, but they have provided no evidence of this. Thus, the shoe factory would be a better shelter site.

A questionable technique used in the council member’s argument is that of

(A) asserting that a lack of evidence against a view is proof that the view is correct

"...that the view" is referring to the view that the courthouse would be a better shelter site, not the factory. Had this choice said "another view" then yes A would be correct.

(B) accepting a claim simply because advocates of an opposing claim have not adequately defended their view
Correct...although "accepting a claim" isn't the most optimal way to put it because it's the council member that put forth the recommendation so technically he/she isn't 'accepting' anything

(C) attacking the proponents of the courthouse rather than addressing their argument
-the member didn't attack anybody

(D) attempting to persuade its audience by appealing to their fear
-this did not happen

(E) attacking an argument that is not held by any actual council member
-this did not happen

Council member: I recommend that the abandoned shoe factory be used as a municipal emergency shelter. Some council members assert that the courthouse would be a better shelter site, but they have provided no evidence of this. Thus, the shoe factory would be a better shelter site.

A questionable technique used in the council member’s argument is that of

(A) asserting that a lack of evidence against a view is proof that the view is correct - WRONG. 2nd best choice rather more enticing than the correct one. CM never said that his/her argument is correct. Here, he/she just says it is a better option as other is presented without evidence.

(B) accepting a claim simply because advocates of an opposing claim have not adequately defended their view - CORRECT. POE helps. Though i must say i have apprehensions about the words "accepting" and "defending". CM is himself/herself making a claim not accepting. Also, there was no part of the passage that suggests that counter option was defended. But anyway.

(C) attacking the proponents of the courthouse rather than addressing their argument - WRONG. Not attacking. It is also not about the addressing the counter argument but the way his/her is forwarded.

(D) attempting to persuade its audience by appealing to their fear - WRONG. Altogether wrong.

(E) attacking an argument that is not held by any actual council member - WRONG. Like C this is also nowhere to find or infer from the passage.

Answer B.