Practice Quiz

LSAT

Category - Logical Reasoning

Start a Study Session Sign up for Question of the Day
Amy: “It is a proven fact that wind can provide a more reliable source of energy than fossil fuels. Dr. Malcolm Wolf recently produced a paper explaining that there is essentially unlimited potential for wind power.”

Zack: “That claim cannot be correct. Dr. Wolf was found to have fabricated another study about solar power, and so his opinions cannot be trusted.”

Zack’s argument attacks Amy’s assertion by
  1. Showing that Amy’s reasoning is flawed.
  2. Showing that there is source of power superior to wind power, so Amy's assertions can’t be correct.
  3. Showing that the evidence cited by Amy is based on unreliable sources.
  4. Undercutting the reliability of the author behind the evidence Amy cites.
  5. Pointing out that Amy does not have the background or expertise necessary to give a qualified opinion on the subject.
Explanation
Answer: D - Zack’s argument attacks Amy’s assertion by undercutting the reliability of the author behind the evidence Amy cites. Zack doesn’t point out problems with the evidence itself, but rather shows that the author of the evidence has proven unreliable in other areas, implying that his opinions cannot be trusted here.
Previous Next
Was this helpful? Upvote!
Login to contribute your own answer or details
Start a Study Session Sign up for Question of the Day

Top questions

Related questions

Most popular on PracticeQuiz