princeR wrote:In general, if we get a benefit but it is never qualified (no weaknesses) is the correct answer going to have something to do with?
Flaw: Overlooks the negatives
Necessary: That any potential negatives wont outweigh the benefits
Sound about right?
Kind of like whenever we are giving "choices", the answer is going to correlate to the choices.
That's about right.
When an argument concludes some particular thing is a benefit/good thing without addressing/considering other options or possible evidence that the concluded 'good thing' may not be all that great, the correct answer choice will usually exploit that relationship in some way, whether it be a weaken, strengthen, evaluate, or flawed method of reasoning question.
It's a commonly repeated argument structure in LSAT LR questions. Many of the glaring examples use superlatives in the argument such as 'best', 'most effective/likely to do/achieve', and other language in the conclusion and/or in the premises and sometimes in answer choices.
A similar variation is where an argument concludes that a certain thing or tactic is the ONLY way to accomplish something/cause something to happen or makes a recommendation 'should' conclusion about how to solve a problem or best accomplish something.
The flaw can be described in many ways and has several related variations.
Presumes without justification that there are not better solutions.
Fails to consider alternative solutions and/or possibilities.
It's a bread and butter flawed LSAT LR argument type used commonly in several question types.