Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: LR question HELP!  (Read 1147 times)

Haz

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 186
    • View Profile
LR question HELP!
« on: May 27, 2004, 01:56:37 AM »
This one, though appearing to be simple, boggles my friggin mind. Someone help me understand this.


[  The only plants in the garden were tulips, but they were tall tulips.  So the only plants in the garden were tall plants.

Which one of the following exhibits faulty reasoning most similar to the faulty reasoning in the argument above?  ]


--Now, I don't need to list the MC because I don't see how the reasoning is faulty.  If a tulip is a plant, and the tulip is tall, then the plant is tall.  It is the only type of plant in the garden.  Help ???.
Hello Wisconsin!

Brazil Boy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: LR question HELP!
« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2004, 02:09:31 AM »
I think it would be greatly helpful to see the answer choices, but perhaps the flaw in reasoning is one of ignoring relativity: a tall tulip is not necessarily a "tall plant," certainly not when compared to, say, a redwood or an eucalyptus regnans.

Haz

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 186
    • View Profile
Re: LR question HELP!
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2004, 02:15:45 AM »
You really don't need to see the answer choices because the question gives the information for what I need to know.

I appreciate the response:

BUT if a tulip is a plant (as the statement says it is), and the tulip is tall, then it MUST be a tall plant.. right? You are bringing in info from your outside knowledge, comparing it to redwood and eucalyptus.  (I thought) these questions can only be answered using the info in the statement itself. What is tall? It doesn't matter because it says the tulip IS tall.. therefore it is always tall.  I see what your getting at but I'm not satisfied  :)
Hello Wisconsin!

jacy85

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6859
    • View Profile
Re: LR question HELP!
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2004, 08:06:55 AM »
I think you shouldn't be so quick to discount what Brazil Boy's saying.  Why do tall tulips have to be tall plants?  I can have a group of 2 year olds, and say they are all tall, but does that mean they're all 6 feet tall?  of course not.  It means they are tall 2 year olds.  So just because they are all tall tulips, they do not all have to be tall plants.  You, in your response, just found the faulty reasoning when you asked "what is tall"  The tulip *could* be a tall plant, or it could a small plant, just taller than other types of tulips.  Be careful where you throw in that word *must*.  It's not something to be taken lightly on the lsat.

Brazil Boy, IMHO, gave you the correct faulty reasoning.

Hazzy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: LR question HELP!
« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2004, 10:43:11 AM »
I think Brazil Boy and Jacy are right. 

Something along the lines of that reasoning:

The only people in Mrs. Smith's 1st grade class are children, but they were tall children.  So the only people in Mrs. Smith's 1st grade class were tall people. 

Hazzy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
Re: LR question HELP!
« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2004, 10:43:49 AM »
My example isn't perfect my anymeans...but similar.

Haz

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 186
    • View Profile
Re: LR question HELP!
« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2004, 01:06:45 PM »
Thanks for the response guys.

I guess I didn't realize there was room for subjective judgement on the LSAT.  My impression is that if an attribute is stated, then that attribute holds regardless of it's relativity. This is a tough one to swallow and hopefully I can think that way for the remainder of these practice tests, though I won't be surprised to miss it again  :-[
Hello Wisconsin!

jacy85

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6859
    • View Profile
Re: LR question HELP!
« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2004, 01:40:50 PM »
The only people in Mrs. Smith's 1st grade class are children, but they were tall children.  So the only people in Mrs. Smith's 1st grade class were tall people. 

Thanks for phrasing your answer a little clearer than I did!  I wrote my post this morning while I was killing some time before leaving for work, and while I sat on the train for 25 mintues, I realized that if I'd phrased it differently (like you had), it would've been way better!

Meltdown

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 183
    • View Profile
Re: LR question HELP!
« Reply #8 on: May 27, 2004, 02:53:18 PM »
Thanks for the response guys.

I guess I didn't realize there was room for subjective judgement on the LSAT.  My impression is that if an attribute is stated, then that attribute holds regardless of it's relativity. This is a tough one to swallow and hopefully I can think that way for the remainder of these practice tests, though I won't be surprised to miss it again  :-[

I think they have wiggle room to do this because the directions talk about common sense assumptions. There's a certain set of general stuff they expect you to already know just from being an educated adult. The tall tulip vs tall plant thing would fall under that, I think.