Top Law Schools

Hey everyone! *This thread contains spoilers to PT 77. If you haven't taken the PT, this thread could ruin a particularly difficult question.*

[+] Spoiler

What confused me here about (D) are the words “fails to exclude.” I tried to parse them out, but was not successful. "Exclude" means to "deny access." To “Fail” to “exclude" would mean the argument “doesn't deny access to the possibility…” I thought (D) was a trap answer in which if we read it quickly, we read into it what we want-like answer choice (C) of number 14 of this very same section (if “can” actually read “can’t” it would be correct.)

Furthermore, I chose (B) because it is literally true, but apparently is not technically speaking a flaw. On further review (D) can be read as the argument is flawed because it “never denied the possibility…” In “Never denying the possibility…” the argument actually never dealt with possible reasons why people would say Shakespeare didn’t write his plays (I.E. objections to the view that it is motivated “purely by snobbery.”)

This is part of what makes the LSAT so difficult. It appears to me to be an ultra-convoluted way to point out a flaw in someone’s reasoning to state that they “fail to exclude” the possibility of something, because when I read “fails to exclude” I think ok: they included. It just seems like a clunky and convoluted way to point something out that must be read in a specific way. But hey, that's the game

Experienced test-takers: if you don’t mind, could you shed some light on your thought process and how you would differentiate between (B) and (D) for me?

-Thank you!

There are several flaws in the argument, but only one answer choice captures any of the flaws.

Flaw #1: The conclusion concerns everyone who makes this claim about Shakespeare, but the reasoning (even if it were good) only applies to many of these people. So the conclusion should read "Many of those who claim that..."

Flaw #2: There isn't good reasoning here in favor of these people being motivated even partly by snobbery. For example, are these people even aware that they are the aristocrats' descendants?

Flaw #3: Even if there were good reasoning supporting the claim that these people are motivated partly by snobbery, this doesn't show that they are motivated purely by snobbery. Once again, the conclusion is too strong.

Answer choice D actually captures Flaw #2 and Flaw #3. "Fails to exclude the possibility" means "fails to rule out the possibility". The argument fails to rule out the possibility that the people actually have evidence to back up their claim about Shakespeare. So, even if the premises of the argument are true, it is possible that the people aren't motivated at all by snobbery (Flaw #2), and it is also possible that they are motivated in part by snobbery yet they are not motivated purely by snobbery (Flaw #3).

Back to answer choice B: This is a bit of a trap answer. Take out the word "purely" and it's a good answer choice because it captures Flaw #3. Throw in the word "purely" and it is no longer a flaw. If you are motivated purely by snobbery to make a claim about Shakespeare then, by definition, nothing else is motivating you to make that claim.

Hope that helps

Thank you so much for the reply. I've been looking at this question for about a day. Maybe you can speak to this, but my observation has been that on the 2 newer tests I have taken (if we define "newer" as post 65 or so) there seems to be trap flaw questions that essentially prey on the test-taker's knowledge of "cookie-cutter" flaws, but slip a more subtle flaw into the stimulus and subsequently an even more subtle description of that flaw into the AC.

[+] Spoiler

PT 67-Section 2 Question 13

is the perfect example of this.

Hmm, one difference between those two questions is that on 77-2-18 the trap answer looks very similar to the prephrase that you should have come up with before looking at the answer choices, but you need to pay careful attention to the language used in trap answer to notice that it is not actually the flaw that you were looking for. Whereas in 67-2-13 the trap answer [well, I think a lot of students pick A on this one so I'm just assuming that's what you had in mind] shouldn't sound at all like what you were prephrasing. It's an example of an answer choice that looks a lot better if you didn't prephrase and you go in searching for the flaw to be revealed in the answer choices.