#15 - Columnist: Many car manufacturers trumpet their cars'

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[bli2016]

I think this is supposed to be an easy question, but I got stuck on answer choice B because I thought maybe the columnist is driving in area's with abnormal driving conditions (and the car manufacturers are basing their claims upon normal driving conditions). I understand that 3 cars is a very small sample size, but how can I easily eliminate B?

[Jonathan Evans]

Good question, Bli! In fact, your statement is indicative of a necessary methodological adjustment you could make. Note that in our prephrase of this problem, we should critique this argument on the grounds that we have insufficient evidence to reach the author's conclusion on the basis of the author's anecdotal evidence. What does that mean, "anecdotal"? It means that one person's experiences are insufficient to reach such a broad conclusion. Nail this prephrase down: the argument reaches an overly broad conclusion based on narrow evidence.

Now note the contrast between (A) and (B). (A) is a good match, but is (B) even in the ballpark? Not really. Does the author actually assume that driving conditions are the same everywhere? Perhaps, but we don't have definitive evidence to suggest this is the flaw.

The overall point here is not to start making a case for particular answer choices. Rely on your observations and analysis as a tool to eliminate incorrect answers.

[Etsevdos]

RE: B - I guess the driver could still be driving under "normal conditions" for all three cars, therefore A is a better answer? I am still struggling a bit with B so can you give me an example of how B would work? Thanks

[Claire Horan]

(B) says the columnist's argument presumes that driving conditions are the same in every region, but that doesn't have to be the case for the columnists argument. If driving conditions differed but drivers in the most average condition could still get nowhere close to the manufacturers' claimed fuel economy, that would actually bolster the columnist's argument. So, since the columnist doesn't necessarily presume the sameness of driving conditions in every region, this can't be the answer. Take it in two parts:

1) Does the answer choice correctly describe what is happening in the stimulus? (i.e. Does the columnist presume what the answer choice says she does?)

2) If yes, does that presumption make the argument vulnerable to criticism?

For (A), the answer choice (1) accurately describes a feature of the columnist's argument (drawing a conclusion on a sample size that is too small, and (2) that basis does make the argument vulnerable to criticism.

[lsatnoobie]

Would answer choice B would be correct if it said "presumes, without providing justification, that driving conditions are NORMAL in every geographical region."

I think it might because the other glaring flaw in the argument is that the columnist assumes he's driving under normal conditions, and not like a maniac drag racing.

would the altered version of answer choice B, which includes the subset of the author assuming that he/she was driving under normal conditions, be correct?

[Brook Miscoski]

LSAT Noobie,

This is an argument based on a sample, so the right answer will point out something wrong with the sample. You are correct to think that whether the sample is representative can be an issue, although in this case the number is so small that you have to pick A.

If you were going to make B competitive, you would have to say that the author presumes without justification that his own driving conditions have been normal driving conditions. In other words, the author would have to presume that his sample is normal, not that every single condition is normal.

[LearntheLSAT]

Hi all,

I selected C the first go around because I thought in the world of LSAT, he was the cited source. Obviously, his anecdotal story does not equate to applicable experience nor representative of everyone, so the claim is bias and unreliable. If this is not the "claim" which portion of the stim is the "claim" found? The one about the manufacturers?

[KelseyWoods]

Hi LearntheLSAT!

"Source of the cited claim" means the source of a different claim that the person making the argument (in this case the columnist) refers to. Using anecdotal evidence is not really the same as citing yourself as a source. Instead, the "source of the cited claim" in the columnist's arguments are the car manufacturers. They are the source of the information about their cars' fuel economy. So the columnist doesn't overlook that the source of the claim about fuel economy may be biased an unreliable--his whole argument is that they ARE biased and unreliable.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[lichenfarmer]

Hi! I was stuck between A and D and ultimately chose D because it seemed like the columnist made a circular reasoning flaw as well as a sample flaw. I took the first sentence and the last sentence to mean the same thing, which I'm still having trouble differentiating. How should I approach something like this in the exam? I feel like both of them are right