LSAT Explanation PT 26, S3, Q10: Tires may be either underinflated, overinflated,

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the argument's reasoning? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is D. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The argument states that tires may be either underinflated, overinflated, or neither. The author concludes that we can safely assume that underinflation or overinflation of tires harms their tread, based on the premise that no one has been able to show that these do not harm tire tread. The structure of the argument is as follows:

Premise: No one has been able to show that underinflation or overinflation does not harm tire tread.

Conclusion: We can assume that underinflation or overinflation of tires harms their tread.

The flaw in this argument is that the author treats the lack of evidence against a claim (that underinflation or overinflation does not harm tire tread) as evidence for the claim (that underinflation or overinflation does harm tire tread). This is a "lack of evidence" flaw.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument would be: "Is there any evidence that supports the claim that underinflation or overinflation of tires harms their tread?"

The question type of this problem is Flaw, and it asks us to identify the flaw in the argument's reasoning. Let's go through each answer choice:

a) The argument assumes what it is attempting to demonstrate.

This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not engage in circular reasoning. The premise and conclusion are not the same.

b) The argument overlooks that what is not in principle susceptible to proof might be false.

This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not assume that the claim is not susceptible to proof. The argument only states that no one has been able to show the opposite claim.

c) The argument fails to specify how it is that underinflation or overinflation harms tire tread.

This answer choice is incorrect because it is not a flaw in the argument. While the argument does not specify how underinflation or overinflation harms tire tread, it is not necessary for the conclusion to follow.

d) The argument rejects the possibility that what has not been proven is nevertheless true.

This answer choice is correct because it accurately describes the flaw in the argument. The argument treats the lack of evidence against a claim as evidence for the claim, rejecting the possibility that the claim might still be true even if it has not been proven.

e) The argument fails to precisely define the terms "underinflation" and "overinflation."

This answer choice is incorrect because it is not a flaw in the argument. Precise definitions of these terms are not necessary for the conclusion to follow.

In conclusion, the correct answer is D, as it accurately describes the flaw in the argument's reasoning.