Essayist: People once believed that Earth was at the center of the uni

Question

Essayist: People once believed that Earth was at the center of the universe, and that, therefore, Earth and its inhabitants were important. We now know that Earth revolves around a star at the outskirts of a spiral arm of one of countless galaxies. Therefore, people’s old belief that Earth and its inhabitants were important was false.

A flaw in the essayist’s argument is that the argument

(A) presumes, without providing justification, that only true statements can have good reasons to be believed
(B) neglects to consider that a statement that was believed for questionable reasons may nevertheless have been true
(C) fails to consider that there can be no reason for disbelieving a true statement
(D) overlooks the fact that people’s perception of their importance changed from century to century
(E) neglects the fact that people’s perception of their importance varies from culture to culture

Bunuel · Answer

EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT

This question exhibits a commonly-repeated flaw on the LSAT: Disproof of an  argument  being taken as disproof of that argument’s  conclusion . Just because an argument is bad doesn’t mean that the argument’s conclusion can’t still be correct.

An example of this flawed thinking would be, “The cops planted the bloody glove, therefore OJ did not actually commit the crime.” I agree that the cops ruined their case against OJ through their misconduct, and I think it’s right that OJ therefore walks, because we need to discourage future police misconduct. But the fact that some of the evidence was shown to be faulty does not prove that OJ didn’t commit the crime. A rock-solid alibi would  prove  he didn’t do it. A videotape of someone else doing the crime would prove he didn’t do it. Unfortunately for OJ, he doesn’t have either of these, and all other evidence suggests he is insane. The most likely scenario seems to be that the cops are crooked, the prosecutors were weak, and OJ, nevertheless, did actually do it.

Another example of this concept would be something like, “It’s raining outside, therefore San Francisco is in California.” This argument is horrible. The only premise (“it’s raining outside”) has nothing to do with the conclusion. But a terrible argument doesn’t disprove its own conclusion: the conclusion of the argument can still be correct.

A) I don’t think the argument does this, partially because I don’t even know what it means. I’m hoping to find something that I can understand, and that matches my predicted flaw.

B) Yep. This is a good description of the flaw of taking disproof of  an argument  to mean disproof of that argument’s conclusion, so it’s almost certainly the correct answer.

C) What? This is nonsensical. There can be all sorts of good reasons for disbelieving a true statement. Example: If you were OJ’s friend, but you didn’t know he was completely crazy, then maybe you wouldn’t believe the prosecutor when he told you OJ did it, even though in retrospect you’d have to agree that he obviously did it. Anyway B was exactly what I predicted, so I don’t need to waste any more time on C.

D) Is it even a  given fact  that people’s perception of their importance changed from century to century? I’m not sure it is. Anyway this isn’t what I was looking for. B is still the leader.

E) Again, I’m not sure this is a fact we were provided. And I’m also not sure it’s relevant.

Our answer is B.

This was a relatively easy question if you’ve seen the flaw a few times, but could be a very difficult question if you haven’t seen it before. The answer choices here are confusing, so if you don’t have an idea what you’re looking for you’re probably in really big trouble. Keep practicing

unraveled · Answer

Essayist: People once believed that Earth was at the center of the universe, and that, therefore, Earth and its inhabitants were important. We now know that Earth revolves around a star at the outskirts of a spiral arm of one of countless galaxies. Therefore, people’s old belief that Earth and its inhabitants were important was false.

A flaw in the essayist’s argument is that the argument

(A) presumes, without providing justification, that  only true statements can have good reasons to be believed  - WRONG. Reverses the conclusion and implements the logic which may or may not be true. This application is flawed.
(B)  neglects to consider  that a statement that was believed for questionable reasons  may nevertheless have been true  - CORRECT. It can still be true so claiming it false is wrong. POE certainly helps as the options are worded heavily.
(C) fails to consider that there  can be no reason for disbelieving a true statement  - WRONG. Somewhat the argument does this by concluding as it is. So, it does not fails to do that. But a better explanation is that if A is believed for some reason but that reason is found out to be not true thus the believing A is not true.
(D) overlooks the fact that people’s  perception of their importance changed  from century to century - WRONG. 
(E) neglects the fact that people’s  perception of their importance varies  from culture to culture - WRONG.

D and E are out as they are similar in scope that is irrelevant. 
A is plain reversal case of logic.
Only B and C make some sense but C goes a little berserk in its claim.

Answer B.

Essayist: People once believed that Earth was at the center of the uni

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Essayist: People once believed that Earth was at the center of the uni

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards