June 2013 LSAT, LR1, Q14, investigating a forest fire

Crowdsourcing the June 2013 LSAT:  June 2013 LSAT Explanation Central | About this project Interesting. I had to read this one a couple times before I found the flaw. I think the problem is that the argument ignores process of elimination as a way to prove something. On the LSAT, if you know for sure that A, B, and C are not the answer, then you do know for sure that D or E must be the answer, even though you have no idea whether the answer is D or E. Imagine a murder case where you know that the killer had to be inside the house at the time of the murder. You don't know whether Mom smothered the baby or Dad smothered the baby, but you do know that nobody else could have done it, so you do know that "Mom or Dad" smothered the baby.

That's the gist of it. Since this is a Matching Flaw question, all I have to do now is pick the answer that makes the exact same flaw. My two examples above will be my guide here... I want something that's parallel to not only the given argument, but also to my two model answers.

A. Looks good to me. It could be a tossup between Kim and Sada, and you might have no idea which one is actually going to win (perhaps you've been in Malaysia for the past year, and only found out today who was even in the race), but you could, nonetheless, know that either Kim or Sada is going to win if they're the only two running. This looks like a perfect answer.

B. "One theory is as plausible as the other"? That simply does not match the given argument, or my example arguments. No way.

C. Most-most-most is definitely a flaw (Most babies drank milk, most murderers drank milk, so most babies are murderers... or some such nonsense) but that's not the flaw that was present in the given argument. Next please.

D. I stopped reading this after I started seeing all the "some"s. This is just like C. Probably a flaw, but not the flaw we were looking for. I can't be bothered.

E. The car could have been driven by two people at once? That's silly, but it's not the flaw we were looking for.

Our answer is A... it's almost too good to be true (which, on the LSAT, almost always means it's the correct answer.)

Please ask questions and/or suggest corrections to anything that seems confusing... we want to make this the best resource we can for LSAT students. We'll have all the June 2013 explanations up as quickly as possible. Thanks for reading. Tell your friends!


About me: I'm  the owner of Fox LSAT and FoxTestPrep.com. Please email me at fox.edit@gmail.com, call me at 415-518-0630, Tweet me @nfoxcheck out my books here, and watch 15 hours of free LSAT classes here.

Crowdsourcing the June 2013 LSAT:  June 2013 LSAT Explanation Central | About this project