#24 - Professor: A person who can select a beverage from

[candaceross]

Hello,

I narrowed the answer choices to A and C. And I chose C. I was wondering if the reason A is correct is because of the use of the word "example" rather than "analogy" If so, can you please explain the difference between the two words. Or, if there is another reason A is right and C is wrong.

Thanks so much!
Candace

[mpoulson]

Hello,

I have read the analysis provided and ultimately chose A. However, I spent too much time trying to figure out why C is wrong? Can you articulate in a different way why C is wrong? From my perspective, the use of the words "analogy" could be the problem. Since the difference b/w principle and conclusion seems almost too subtle for even a diligent LSAT student. Nevertheless, if this is the case please expound about the previous explanation to help me understand. I appreciate all the help?

V/r,

Micah

[Adam Tyson]

In the language of LSAT authors (the folks at LSAC, that is, not the folks who are speaking in the stimuli), an example is a specific case that is used to highlight a more general idea. "People who eat meat are less healthy than vegetarians - just look at my cousin Phil, a meat eater who is very unhealthy."

An analogy is a comparison between similar cases. An argument about maintaining a good relationship requiring lots of care and attention, not waiting for a problem to appear, might be compared to doing preventive maintenance on a car - that's an analogy.

I won't pretend to be an English teacher, and I suppose there are more subtle, nuanced differences between examples and analogies than my simple analysis here, but for LSAT purposes it is that simple. Analogies are comparisons to something different but similar enough to be useful (unless it is a bad analogy, which is a Flaw in the Reasoning), while examples are specific instances of the more general topic being discussed.

In this question, the author is not comparing freedom to choose a drink to some other sort of freedom, but is using the beverage example as a specific instance that illustrates his broader theme about freedom.

[mpoulson]

Thank you.

[deck1134]

Hi PowerScore staff,

I was writing to ask about this question. The two instructors have given different answers for why A is correct over C and I am not sure what to do.

I was able to narrow this down to A and C because all of the other answers were somewhat obviously incorrect. Looking at A and C, I realized that the statement in question, "It is clear, then, that meaningful freedom cannot be measured simply by the number of alternatives available..." is both a principle and a conclusion to the argument. How should I proceed with this? While the comparison is an example, I recalled that the definition of an analogy is: "a comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification," which seems to also encompass the stimulus.

Help!

Thanks
-DK

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Deck,

I combed through prior responses and excised any that didn't have sufficient clarity. Adam's response above nails the point of difference between (A) and (C). Thanks!

[deck1134]

Dave,

Thanks for the diligence. This forum is really helpful. Sorry to waste your time!

[Dave Killoran]

Not a waste at all--it needed to be cleaned up! It's better now

[jwheeler]

I incorrectly chose C the first time and I see how it's not an analogy, but I was a little tricked by A. The question asks how the argument proceeds, then A says by supporting a general principle by means of an example. In my mind, I read that as the stimulus states a general principle, then gives an example to support this. The order here obviously wouldn't match what actually happened.

Does the order of the argument matter for a question like this? Or am I just reading into the answer too much?

Many thanks!

[Brook Miscoski]

jwheeler,

When answering a method of reasoning question, the logical relationship of the elements of the answer choice are important. The particular order in which the elements are stated is unlikely to be important.

The professor used the beverages example to support his general principle. The order was example, then principle. The logical relationship was example supports principle. Even though (A) does not capture the order, it captures the logical relationship, which is what you want to look for.