Idea Application: Correct and Incorrect Answers Analyzed

In this section we present and analyze two Logical Reasoning questions drawn
from real LSATs. We will use the two examples to discuss the various answer
types presented in the previous section and to discuss the language used by the
test makers in the answer choices.
Please take a moment to complete the following problem:
1. Garbage in this neighborhood probably will not be collected until Thursday this week. Garbage is usually collected here on Wednesdays, and the garbage collectors in this city are extremely reliable. However, Monday was a public holiday, and after a public holiday that falls on a Monday, garbage throughout the city is supposed to be collected one
day later than usual.
The argument proceeds by
(A) treating several pieces of irrelevant evidence
as though they provide support for the
conclusion
(B) indirectly establishing that one thing is likely
to occur by directly ruling out all of the
alternative possibilities
(C) providing information that allows application
of a general rule to a specific case
(D) generalizing about all actions of a certain kind
on the basis of a description of one such
action
(E) treating something that is probable as though
it were inevitable
As usual, we begin by analyzing the structure of the problem:
Premise: Garbage is usually collected here on Wednesdays, and the
garbage collectors in this city are extremely reliable.
Premise: Monday was a public holiday.
Premise: After a public holiday that falls on a Monday, garbage
throughout the city is supposed to be collected one day later
than usual.
Conclusion: Garbage in this neighborhood probably will not be collected
until Thursday this week.
The argument is sound and the conclusion seems reasonable. The language in
the conclusion is not absolute (“probably”), and this is justified since the
language used in the argument—“usually” and “supposed to be”—is also
probabilistic. Knowing that the argument is valid, the question you must ask
yourself is, “How would I describe the structure of this argument?”
Answer choice (A): This answer forces you to make an assessment of the
premises (the “evidence”) as they relate to the conclusion. Are the premises
irrelevant to the conclusion? Clearly not. Therefore, this answer is incorrect.
Answer choice (B): This is a half-right, half-wrong answer. The argument does
establish “that one thing is likely to occur.” But, is this established by ruling out
all of the alternative possibilities? No, to do that would mean presenting
arguments against the garbage being collected on Friday, Saturday, Sunday, etc.
Since this section of the answer choice does not occur, this answer is incorrect.
Also, because the argument does not rule out all the alternatives, the conclusion
is not established “indirectly.”
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer. Consider each piece of the
argument:
“providing information”—a variety of information about the garbage
situation is provided.
“application of a general rule”—the general rule is that “After a public
holiday that falls on a Monday, garbage throughout the city is supposed
to be collected one day later than usual.”
“to a specific case”—the specific case is the pickup of garbage this week in
this neighborhood.
Given that all elements occurred and the answer presents an accurate
description of the way the author made his or her argument, this answer is
correct. Now, take a moment and compare this answer to the prephrase you
made after reading the stimulus. How similar are the two? Given that you may
not be familiar with the language used by the test makers, the two may not be
very similar. As your preparation continues, you will become more comfortable
with the language and your Method of Reasoning prephrasing will improve.
For example, note the use in this answer of “general rule” to describe the last
sentence of the stimulus. The test makers could also have used a phrase like
“basic principle” to achieve the same result. Your job is to match their language
to what occurred in the stimulus.
Answer choice (D): This answer is an overgeneralization—a situation where
one instance is used to make a broad based conclusion. This is a Reverse
Answer since the stimulus actually uses a general principle and applies it to one
instance. In addition, the language in the answer is far too strong in saying “all
actions of a certain kind” when the language in the stimulus was probabilistic.
Answer choice (E): This is an Exaggerated Answer. The conclusion states that
“Garbage in this neighborhood probably will not be collected until Thursday
this week” and the use of “probably” is a clear and obvious indication that the
author does not think the Thursday garbage pickup is inevitable.
Now try another. Please take a moment to complete the following problem:

Incorrect Answers in Must Be True Questions

Shell Game answers occur in all LSAT question types, not just Must Be True.
As we will see in later chapters, the Shell Game can also be played with
elements in a stimulus.
Reverse Answers can occur in any type of question.
There are several types of answers that appear in Must Be True questions that
are incorrect. These answers appear frequently enough that we have provided a
review of the major types below. Each answer category below is designed to
attract you to an incorrect answer choice, and after this brief review we will
examine several LSAT questions and analyze actual instances of these types of
answers.
1. Could Be True or Likely to Be True Answers
Because the criteria in the question stem requires you to find an answer
choice that Must Be True, answers that only could be true or are even
likely to be true are incorrect. These answers are attractive because there
is nothing demonstrably wrong with them (for example, they do not
contain statements that are counter to the stimulus). Regardless, like all
incorrect answers these answers fail the Fact Test. Remember, you must
select an answer choice that must occur based on what you have read.
This category of incorrect answer is very broad, and some of the types
mentioned below will fall under this general idea but place an emphasis
on a specific aspect of the answer.
2. Exaggerated Answers
Exaggerated Answers take information from the stimulus and then stretch
that information to make a broader statement that is not supported by the
stimulus. In that sense, this form of answer is a variation of a could be
true answer since the exaggeration is possible, but not proven based on
the information. Here is an example:
If the stimulus states, “Some software vendors recently implemented
more rigorous licensing procedures.”
An incorrect answer would exaggerate one or more of the elements:
“Most software vendors recently implemented more rigorous
licensing procedures.” In this example, some is exaggerated to most.
While it could be true that most software vendors made the change,
the stimulus does not prove that it must be true. This type of answer
is often paraphrased, creating a deadly combination where the
language is similar enough to be attractive but different enough to be
incorrect.
Here is another example:
If the stimulus states, “Recent advances in the field of molecular
biology make it likely that many school textbooks will be rewritten.”
The exaggerated and paraphrased version would be: “Many school
textbooks about molecular biology will be re-written.” In this
example, likely has been dropped, and this omission exaggerates the
certainty of the change. The paraphrase also is problematic because
the stimulus referenced school textbooks whereas the paraphrased
answer refers to school textbooks about molecular biology.
3. “New” Information Answers