LSAT Explanation PT 34, S2, Q11: Some psychologists claim that, in theory,

LSAT Question Stem

The argument is most vulnerable to the criticism that it 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is C. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The argument can be summarized as follows:

Premise 1: Some psychologists claim that the best way to understand another person is through deep empathy.

Premise 2: Deep empathy is psychologically impossible.

Conclusion: The psychologists are wrong.

The author is arguing that because deep empathy is impossible, the psychologists' claim must be incorrect. However, the psychologists only claim that deep empathy is the best way to understand another person, not the only way. This is where the argument is vulnerable to criticism.

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. The correct answer is C.

Answer choice A is incorrect because the argument does not hinge on the definition of "deep empathy." The issue is with the author's interpretation of the psychologists' claim.

Answer choice B is incorrect because the argument does not assume something that it later denies. The author considers the psychologists' claim and then attempts to refute it, but there is no contradiction in this process.

Answer choice C is correct because the argument confuses a theoretically best way of accomplishing something with the only way of accomplishing it. The psychologists claim that deep empathy is the best way to understand another person, but the author mistakenly assumes that this means it is the only way.

Answer choice D is incorrect because the argument does not accept a claim on mere authority. The author is actually challenging the psychologists' claim.

Answer choice E is incorrect because the argument does not need to consider the opinions of other psychologists. The flaw lies in the author's interpretation of the psychologists' claim, not in the lack of alternative viewpoints.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Are there other ways to understand another person besides deep empathy?"

In conclusion, the correct answer is C because the argument confuses a theoretically best way of accomplishing something with the only way of accomplishing it. The author mistakenly assumes that if deep empathy is the best way to understand another person, it must also be the only way.