Actually, Law Services now calls themselves the “producers of the LSAT.” This
signifies that some important test-making functions are now outsourced.
Let us take a moment to differentiate the makers of the test from the author of
each stimulus. The maker of the test is Law Services, the organization that
oversees the protocols under which the LSAT is constructed, administers the
test, and processes and distributes the results. The stated purpose of the test
makers is to examine your ability to analyze arguments, in an attempt to assess
your suitability for law school. The author of the stimulus is the person from
whose point of view each piece is written or the source from which the piece is
drawn. Sometimes the persona of the author is made abundantly clear to you because
the stimulus is prefaced by a short identifier, such as Politician or
Professor, or even a proper name such as Fran or Inez. The source of a
stimulus can also be made clear by similar identifiers, such as Advertisement
or Editorial.
Consider the following argument: “My mail was delivered yesterday, so it
will also be delivered today.”
LSAT students sometimes confuse the aim of the test makers with the way
those aims are executed. We know that Law Services has an active interest in
testing your ability to discern reasoning, both good and bad. The makers of the
exam intentionally present flawed arguments because they want to test if you
are easily confused or prone to be swayed illogical arguments. This often
raises situations where you are presented with arguments that are false or
seemingly deceptive in nature. This does not mean that the author of the piece
is part of the deception. The role of an LSAT author is simply to present an
argument or fact set. LSAT authors (as separated from the test makers) do not
try to deceive you with lies. Although LSAT authors may end up making
claims that are incorrect, this is not done out of a willful intention to deceive.
Deception on the author’s part is too sophisticated for the LSAT—it is beyond
the scope of LSAT stimuli, which are too short to have the level of complexity
necessary for you to detect deception if it was intended. So, you need not feel
as if the author is attempting to trick you in the making of the argument. This
is especially true when premises are created. For example, when an LSAT
author makes a premise statement such as, “19 percent of all research projects
are privately funded,” this statement is likely to be accurate. An LSAT author
would not knowingly create a false premise, and so, when examining
arguments the likelihood is that the premises are not going to be in error and
you should not look at them as a likely source of weakness in the argument.
This does not mean that authors are infallible. LSAT authors make plenty of
errors, but most of those errors are errors of reasoning that occur in the process
of making the conclusion. In later chapters we will examine these flawed
reasoning methods in detail.
Although this argument is flawed (it could be Sunday and the mail will not be
delivered), the author has not intentionally made this error. Rather, the author
has made the conclusion without realizing that an error has occurred.
Not only do LSAT authors not attempt to deceive you, they believe (in their
LSAT-world way) that the arguments they make are reasonable and solid.
When you read an LSAT argument from the perspective of the author, he or
she believes that their argument is sound. In other words, they do not
knowingly make errors of reasoning. This is a fascinating point because it
means that LSAT authors, as part of the LSAT world, function as if the points
they raise and the conclusions they make have been well-considered and are
airtight. This point will be immensely useful when we begin to look at certain
forms of reasoning.
signifies that some important test-making functions are now outsourced.
Let us take a moment to differentiate the makers of the test from the author of
each stimulus. The maker of the test is Law Services, the organization that
oversees the protocols under which the LSAT is constructed, administers the
test, and processes and distributes the results. The stated purpose of the test
makers is to examine your ability to analyze arguments, in an attempt to assess
your suitability for law school. The author of the stimulus is the person from
whose point of view each piece is written or the source from which the piece is
drawn. Sometimes the persona of the author is made abundantly clear to you because
the stimulus is prefaced by a short identifier, such as Politician or
Professor, or even a proper name such as Fran or Inez. The source of a
stimulus can also be made clear by similar identifiers, such as Advertisement
or Editorial.
Consider the following argument: “My mail was delivered yesterday, so it
will also be delivered today.”
LSAT students sometimes confuse the aim of the test makers with the way
those aims are executed. We know that Law Services has an active interest in
testing your ability to discern reasoning, both good and bad. The makers of the
exam intentionally present flawed arguments because they want to test if you
are easily confused or prone to be swayed illogical arguments. This often
raises situations where you are presented with arguments that are false or
seemingly deceptive in nature. This does not mean that the author of the piece
is part of the deception. The role of an LSAT author is simply to present an
argument or fact set. LSAT authors (as separated from the test makers) do not
try to deceive you with lies. Although LSAT authors may end up making
claims that are incorrect, this is not done out of a willful intention to deceive.
Deception on the author’s part is too sophisticated for the LSAT—it is beyond
the scope of LSAT stimuli, which are too short to have the level of complexity
necessary for you to detect deception if it was intended. So, you need not feel
as if the author is attempting to trick you in the making of the argument. This
is especially true when premises are created. For example, when an LSAT
author makes a premise statement such as, “19 percent of all research projects
are privately funded,” this statement is likely to be accurate. An LSAT author
would not knowingly create a false premise, and so, when examining
arguments the likelihood is that the premises are not going to be in error and
you should not look at them as a likely source of weakness in the argument.
This does not mean that authors are infallible. LSAT authors make plenty of
errors, but most of those errors are errors of reasoning that occur in the process
of making the conclusion. In later chapters we will examine these flawed
reasoning methods in detail.
Although this argument is flawed (it could be Sunday and the mail will not be
delivered), the author has not intentionally made this error. Rather, the author
has made the conclusion without realizing that an error has occurred.
Not only do LSAT authors not attempt to deceive you, they believe (in their
LSAT-world way) that the arguments they make are reasonable and solid.
When you read an LSAT argument from the perspective of the author, he or
she believes that their argument is sound. In other words, they do not
knowingly make errors of reasoning. This is a fascinating point because it
means that LSAT authors, as part of the LSAT world, function as if the points
they raise and the conclusions they make have been well-considered and are
airtight. This point will be immensely useful when we begin to look at certain
forms of reasoning.
No comments:
Post a Comment