LSAT Explanation PT 34, S2, Q1: In his new book on his

LSAT Question Stem

The author of the book review commits which one of the following reasoning errors? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is A. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

The question type for this problem is Flaw, and we are asked to identify the reasoning error committed by the author in the passage.

First, let's summarize and analyze the argument in the passage. The author of the book review claims that R's book does not merit attention from serious professionals because R frequently imputes bad faith to researchers disagreeing with him, believes that funding sources often determine investigators' findings, and has a negative personality (arrogant, overly ambitious, and sometimes nasty). The conclusion of the argument is that R's book does not merit attention from serious professionals. The premises are R's negative personality, his belief about funding sources, and his tendency to impute bad faith to other researchers.

The "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Does R's negative personality and beliefs about funding sources have any bearing on the validity or scientific substance of his book?"

Now let's discuss each answer choice:

a) This is the correct answer choice. The author of the book review uses R's negative personality as evidence to claim that R's book does not merit attention from serious professionals. This is a flaw in reasoning because R's character traits do not necessarily have any bearing on the scientific substance of his book. This is known as an ad hominem or source argument, which is a flawed form of reasoning.

b) This answer choice is incorrect. It describes an error made by R, not the author of the book review.

c) This answer choice is incorrect. The passage does not discuss any specific scientific theory, so there is no biased account given by the author of the book review.

d) This answer choice is incorrect. The author of the book review makes only one assertion about the book—that R imputes bad faith to other researchers. This assertion could be easily verified by others.

e) This answer choice is incorrect. The distinction between being true and being interesting is not relevant to the argument in the passage. The author of the book review does not seem to be confused about this distinction; instead, they are making a flawed argument based on R's character traits and beliefs.