LSAT Question Stem

The argument's reasoning is flawed because the argument overlooks the possibility that 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is D. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's analyze the argument in the passage. The passage is structured as follows:

Premise 1: Knowing a lot about history (KH) will make it easy for you to impress intellectuals (EI).

Premise 2: If you have not read a large number of history books (NHB), you will not know much about history (~KH).

Conclusion: If you are not well versed in history due to a lack of reading (NHB), it will not be easy for you to impress intellectuals (~EI).

To provide a simple example that parallels the information in the passage, imagine someone saying that if you can bake a delicious cake (KH), you will be able to impress your friends (EI). However, if you have not learned any baking techniques (NHB), you will not be able to bake a delicious cake (~KH). Therefore, if you haven't learned any baking techniques (NHB), you won't be able to impress your friends (~EI).

The "Evaluate" question for this argument would be: "Are there any other ways to impress intellectuals besides knowing a lot about history?"

Now, let's discuss the question type and answer choices. The question type is a Flaw question, which asks us to identify the flaw in the argument's reasoning.

a) Many intellectuals are not widely read in history: This doesn't address the flaw in the argument's reasoning. The argument is about whether knowing history can help impress intellectuals, not about the knowledge of intellectuals themselves.

b) There are people who learn about history who do not impress intellectuals: This choice doesn't address the flaw either. The argument is about the ease of impressing intellectuals when knowing history, not whether everyone who knows history will actually impress intellectuals.

c) It is more important to impress people who are not intellectuals than people who are intellectuals: This choice is irrelevant to the argument's reasoning. The argument is about impressing intellectuals, not comparing the importance of impressing different groups of people.

d) There are other easy ways to impress intellectuals that do not involve knowing history: This is the correct answer. The argument's reasoning is flawed because it overlooks the possibility that there are alternative ways to impress intellectuals besides knowing history. The argument assumes that not knowing history automatically means it will not be easy to impress intellectuals, which is not necessarily true.

e) People who are not intellectuals can be impressed more easily than people who are intellectuals: This choice is irrelevant to the argument's reasoning as well. The argument is about impressing intellectuals, not comparing the ease of impressing intellectuals to non-intellectuals.

In conclusion, the correct answer is (D), as it points out the flaw in the argument's reasoning by highlighting the overlooked possibility of alternative ways to impress intellectuals that do not involve knowing history.