#15 - It has been said that understanding a person

[Dancingbambarina]

Just to piggyback off of 180Hopeful's post,

I still don't understand how asserting the cause as the only cause is flawed. It says in the LRB that when an Author concludes causally, he or she believes that "the only cause is the one stated in the conclusion and that, unless stated, there are NO OTHER CAUSES that can create that particular effect".

The LRB's reasoning for this is that the author has weighed and considered every possible alternative and then rejected each one, "otherwise, why would the speaker draw the given conclusion?" The speaker, as the LRB says, "must also believe that nothing else could be the causeof lower per capita incomes"

This central assumption is not VIEWED by Powerscore as innately flawed; rather, a weakening answer would elucidate another cause that may have caused the effect, which would be attacking that central assumption. Nonetheless, the central assumption is not viewed by Powerscore as innately flawed.

How then can we say this assumption is flawed when the Author is assumed to have done his or her due dilligence? Ultimately, we would be assuming that the Central Assumption is innately flawed.

With that, i got the right answer here by conditional reasoning; but it would be helpful to be reaffirmed that the causal way of going about this question does NOT align with the core teaching of Powerscore's causal reasoning, unless that causal central assumption is seen as innately flawed, as if this weren't the case then this stimiulus could not be considered flawed.

Thank you so much.

* could not be considered causally flawed

I think you've misunderstood the point the Bible is making in that section. The point the Bible is making is that, yes, the author is making that assumption, but, because that assumption is (as the Bible says in that section) "extreme and far-reaching," it makes the argument itself and the conclusion flawed. You can tell that the Bible wants you to see that argument as flawed by the example that follows the discussion you're referring to (the example of temperatures and per-capita income), where the Bible says that "this is a classic flawed causal argument" and that "the conclusion is flawed."

This is a really important point you need to get clear on: when you see an absolute causal conclusion in an LSAT argument, and when the argument itself doesn't rule out alternative causes, that conclusion will almost certainly be flawed because of the flawed central assumption the author is making.

Hi Jeremy,

Thank you so much for your help. I understand and will implement immediately.

Really appreciate the clearing up. This question has haunted me for months.

Thanks again