Q7 - It is not correct that

[sunhwa2881]

Can you please go over this question? Thank you.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT2]

His point: People in US NOT taxed less than those in other countries.

Evidence:

The amount we don't pay in taxes we pay directly for things taxes would have paid for.

Therefore, this direct pay is tax.

Some of the hardest arguments are the ones that are most heavily flawed, and that's certainly the case here.

Does it make sense to call the money we use for, say, medical bills, a "tax," because some other countries pay for their medical bills using taxes? Absolutely not -- that would be changing, or redefining, the word "tax."

That's what (B) states, and that's why (B) is correct.

This is a fairly unusual flaw -- my rough guess would be that it shows up once every 5 - 7 exams or so, but it's certainly useful to understand how these questions work.

A quick look at the other answers:

(A) is a very common flaw in other arguments, but % vs amount is not an issue here (seems find to base on %'s for the point the author is making).

(C) is not the type of reasoning flaw that the LSAT wants you to look out for (though it may be correct once in a blue moon). In this case, there are certainly reasons given.

(D) is tempting, but "few instances" doesn't exactly match up with the example of medical bills (which would be more like "one component"). Furthermore, the author is not claiming this is the only evidence required, but rather showing it as an example.

(E) is a fairly common type of flaw, but not an issue here -- there is no dichotomy set up that is not exclusive.

Hope that is helpful -- please follow up if you need any further clarification!

[skapur777]

I see how answer B is correct. But how is it fine to base on percentages? He is saying that the US is not the lightest taxed, but even if he proves that the tax percentage is higher in the US, we need concrete numbers to see if the amount of tax US citizens pays is not the lightest.

For example, it could be a high tax percentage but the actual numerical value is quite low. I'm confused!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT2]

Good question -- in other areas, the % vs amount issue is a significant one, but it doesn't play as significant a role here.

Flaw questions are different from, say, questions like Sufficient Assumption in that they are about general reasoning issues, and so they don't have to have answers that "lock up" an argument to be perfectly valid.

As a consequence, flaw questions will involve subjects that could arguably have ambiguous meaning, such as "lightly taxed" --

When people talk about taxation, the commonly understood meaning is in terms of %'s -- we talk about a higher tax rate, or a lower tax rate. Are there flat taxes in the world? Absolutely. But a flat actual tax amount is not what is commonly considered when discussing "lightly taxed."

In order for the primary flaw to be a % vs amount issue, they have to make it clearer that a jump has been made from talking about one to talking about the other. (Example: Bill Gates spends a lower percentage of his money going out to dinners than I do. Therefore, Bill Games spends a smaller amount of money going out to dinners than I do.) Hope that helps. Please follow up if you'd like any further clarification.

[tzyc]

Could anyone explain what (E) means?
Thank you

[maryadkins]

If it sets a dichotomy between alternatives that are not exclusive, that means it creates a dichotomy--an either/or situation (either it's going to downpour or it's going to be a beautiful sunny day)--that doesn't actually cover all the possibilities of what could happen. For example, it could snow? Or drizzle? Or be foggy? Or just so humid it's not a beautiful day. What if it rains in the morning and is beautiful in the afternoon?

The flaw in the weather statement above is that it suggests that only two things can happen, and that they can't happen together. This is a dichotomy between alternatives that aren't exclusive.

[t.vu1986]

The flaw in the weather statement above is that it suggests that only two things can happen, and that they can't happen together. This is a dichotomy between alternatives that aren't exclusive.

Hi Mary,

Would you know the prevalence of questions on dichotomies? Hope to receive word from you soon.

Regards,
Xavier

[tommywallach]

A tiny minority. I wouldn't think of it in terms of "dichotomy questions" anyway. That's not really a thing. It's just a further extension of logical reasoning in general.

[AzzedineI651]

Answer A is tempting because it is essentially "true". But the truth necessitates accepting the fallacy, meaning if you accept paying out of pocket for something other people are taxed for as equivalent to paying tax, then the writer is making a % game (which is also fallacious). However, the "first fallacy is the deepest", in this case, equating paying out of pocket to getting taxed, which is literally the exact opposite of being taxed.