- Wed Sep 13, 2017 5:05 pm
#39686
Take another look, brcibake - does the author assume that the study was flawed because of the inability to generalize them to other species? Try the negation technique on that answer - what if the study was flawed for some reason other than the inability to generalize them to other species? Like, what if the flaw in the study was that the authors of the study failed to observe the rabbits at all times when they could have been mating? Or what if they simply made up their data? Or any number of other possible problems?
More importantly, our author never assumes that the study wass flawed - he says the study is flawed! It's been "shown", although he doesn't say how or why or by whom it was shown. That's not an assumption, but a premise, because assumptions are unstated. He doesn't have to say why it was flawed, nor does he say anything to imply that the flaw has anything to do with the ability to generalize to other species. He just says the study has been shown to be flawed - period.
Assumptions are usually flaws, that much is true. Here, though, the assumption is that a lack of evidence for a claim supports the idea that the claim is false. Since a lack of evidence is not proof of anything, ever, that's the better way to describe the flaw here, and that is what makes A the best answer of the five presented.
Check that assumption again, and see what it was that gave you the idea that our author made that assumption. I think you'll find that there's no reason to believe he assumed that, and if so, then that cannot be the flaw.
Keep at it!
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at
https://twitter.com/LSATadam
