LSAT Explanation PT 26, S2, Q1: Insurance that was to become effective

LSAT Question Stem

The representative's argument is flawed as a counter to the insurance company's contention because 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

In the given passage, we have an argument between an insurance company and a representative of a flight attendant's beneficiary (his mother) regarding the effectiveness of an insurance policy. The insurance company contends that the policy had not become effective, while the representative argues that the policy amount should be paid because the attendant had been his mother's sole support, and she was ill.

Let's break down the argument:

- Premise: The flight attendant was his mother's sole support.

- Premise: The mother is ill.

- Conclusion: The policy amount should be paid.

The question type is a Flaw question, which asks us to identify the flaw in the representative's argument as a counter to the insurance company's contention.

Now, let's evaluate the answer choices:

a) The conclusion is no more than a paraphrase of the evidence offered in support of it.

This answer choice is incorrect because the representative's argument is not circular reasoning. The conclusion is not a mere paraphrase of the premises.

b) It appeals to the emotion of pity rather than addressing the issue raised.

This is the correct answer. The representative's argument is flawed because it appeals to the emotion of pity (the mother being ill and the sole beneficiary) rather than addressing the actual issue raised by the insurance company, which is whether or not the policy had become effective.

c) It makes an unwarranted distinction between family obligations and business obligations.

This answer choice is incorrect because the representative's argument does not make any distinctions between family and business obligations. If anything, it conflates the two by using the family situation to justify the payment of the policy amount.

d) It substitutes an attack on a person for the giving of reasons.

This answer choice is incorrect because the representative's argument does not engage in ad hominem attacks. It does not attack any person but instead focuses on the mother's situation.

e) A cause and its effect are mistaken for each other.

This answer choice is incorrect because the representative's argument does not mistake a cause for an effect. The argument is simply flawed because it appeals to emotion rather than addressing the actual issue raised by the insurance company.

To further understand the argument, let's create an "Evaluate" question: "Was the insurance policy effective at the time of the flight attendant's death?" This question is crucial in determining the validity of the argument because it directly addresses the issue raised by the insurance company.

In conclusion, the representative's argument is flawed because it appeals to the emotion of pity rather than addressing the issue raised by the insurance company. The correct answer to this Flaw question is answer choice B.