Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: KolayAd Hominem (Source Argument)

Citizen: Councilwoman Vance has proposed a new ordinance that would require all commercial buildings to install solar panels, arguing that this will significantly reduce the city's carbon footprint. However, we should vote against this ordinance. Councilwoman Vance is a major shareholder in the city's largest solar panel manufacturing company, so she obviously stands to profit from its passage.

The citizen's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it...

  1. dismisses a proposal solely by criticizing the motives of the person advocating for it.Cevap
  2. B
    presumes, without providing justification, that a causal relationship exists between two correlated events.
  3. C
    relies on the use of a key term in two different senses throughout the argument.
  4. D
    assumes without justification that what is true of a whole must also be true of its constituent parts.
  5. E
    confuses a condition that is necessary for an outcome with a condition that guarantees that outcome.

Cevap

The correct answer is the option stating that the argument dismisses a proposal solely by criticizing the motives of the person advocating for it.
The correct answer accurately describes the citizen's logical error. The citizen dismisses Councilwoman Vance's proposal not by showing that her environmental claims are false or that the policy is inherently bad, but simply by pointing out her financial interest. This is a classic source argument flaw, attacking the motives of the advocate instead of the merits of the argument itself.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the structure of the citizen's argument to identify the conclusion and the supporting premise.
The conclusion is that the city should vote against the solar panel ordinance. The premise given is that Councilwoman Vance stands to financially profit from its passage.
Understanding the core argument structure is the first step in evaluating reasoning flaws.
2
Evaluate the logical relationship between the premise and the conclusion to spot any reasoning errors.
The citizen rejects the ordinance based entirely on Vance's potential financial gain, without addressing the merits of her actual claim regarding the city's carbon footprint.
Identifying the gap between the evidence provided and the conclusion drawn reveals the argument's vulnerability.
3
Match the identified flaw to an abstract description found in the answer choices.
The flaw is an ad hominem (source argument) attack, specifically targeting the motives of the speaker. This matches the option describing a dismissal based on the advocate's motives.
LSAT flaw questions require translating a specific scenario into a general, abstract logical description.

Anahtar Kavram

Ad Hominem (Source Argument)
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Ad Hominem (Source Argument)

Bu konudan daha fazla soru