Q1 - This regions swimmers

[mshinners]

Question Type:
ID the Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
Gotta watch out for those sharks! People think they'll eat you if you swim at night but, since all recent attacks have happened during the day, they're wrong.

Answer Anticipation:
We want to compare the safety of day swimming vs. night swimming (the latter of which deserves a quiet night, for all you REM fans). We know more attacks have happened during the day. In order to compare the overall safety, we need to know the overall number of swimmers at day and at night. If no one swims at night, of course no shark attacks happen then! This flaw can be viewed either as a variety of sampling or comparison flaw.

Correct answer:
(E)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) The argument states night swimming isn't more dangerous than daytime swimming. Since we know some attacks have happened during the day, a few nocturnal hunters won't necessarily hurt the argument that the danger is about the same.

(B) Out of scope. The source isn't mentioned, so it must be the author. While an unreliable narrator might explain The Usual Suspects, we're not allowed to question the author's reliability on the LSAT - just their logic. (Unless, of course, the LSAT gives you a specific reason to.)

(C) Out of scope. The argument is about safety, not anxiety. While the argument mentions anxiety, it's the counterpoint to the author's argument, and we care about the author's argument.

(D) Out of scope. Similar to (C). The argument doesn't assume that the swimmers are wrong; it uses statistics surrounding shark attacks to do so. It uses the statistics poorly, but that's enough to say that the author doesn't just dismiss their opinion.

(E) Bingo. The author talks relative safety levels based on the absolute number of shark attacks. In doing so, the author assumes similar numbers of people swim during the day and at night. This answer deals with the possibility that no one swims in the ocean at night (probably because of the sharks ).

Takeaway/Pattern: If a conclusion compares two things, you need to know that the elements of that comparison are, well, comparable.

#officialexplanation

[carly.applebaum]

I chose C because I thought it gave an alternative reason as to why people don't like to swim at night. But in looking over the test Im confused by the stimulus. Could someone please explain why C is wrong and E is right?

Is it because C is vague ("surroundings") and anxiety does not really mean the same thing as danger?

Thank you!

[timmydoeslsat]

This is a question stem asking us to identify a flaw with the argument.

This argument concludes that, contrary to pop. opinion, it is not more dangerous to swim at night than the day.

Why?

More people have been attacked by sharks during the day than at night.

That would be pretty good evidence except for the fact that we are told the region's swimmers generally swim in the day.

Just to put numbers on this:

Lets say that during the day...

20 out of 100 swimmers are attacked. So a 20% rate.

Then at night we have 1 out 2 swimmers being attacked. So a 50% rate.

We would expect more people to be attacked during the day due to more people actually swimming during the day. This argument overlooks the possibility that if those 100 people swam at night instead of the day, that 20% rate could be a 50% rate, in which case you would have 50 people attacked.

That is what (E) is stating.

Answer choice (C) is building on a premise. We are told that swimmers in that region do not like to swim at night. Being told exactly why that is the case is not necessary in making the conclusion of whether day or night swimming is more dangerous.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Nice explanation Timmy!

I'll just go through the incorrect answers.

Incorrect Answers

(A) is not something argument overlooked, but rather something it presumed.
(B) presumes that "popular opinion" is an unreliable source, but remember the argument runs counter to popular opinion.
(C) is irrelevant. The argument is about the safety of swimming during the day vs. at night. The argument is not about anxiety.
(D) is irrelevant. The argument is not about whether people can be aware of the danger, but rather whether the danger exists.

For a more challenging version of the same question, check out:
PT50, S4, Q22 - Columnist: Several recent studies

[BarryM800]

I got this question wrong by choosing (A). The premise only establishes that daytime shark attacks are also possible, but that does not get to the conclusion that swimming during the day versus at night are equally dangerous, or the other way around (swimming during the day is actually more dangerous). The author fails to consider certain possibilities that could still make night swimming inherently dangerous, which is what (A) is pointing out.

I eliminated (E) because it requires the condition that "more people swam at night," and thought regardless whether people swam in shark-infested water or not, it is still dangerous. Now, I can see the hypothetical "danger" equals to its realization that "if you swim in it you will be attacked." So I think this question is about (E) being a stronger weakener than (A), which also weakens. However, the common consensus is that only one answer choice is correct/weakens and it should not be a judgment of degree. Thus, can any expert shed some light on why (A) is not a weakener at all? Thanks!

[Misti Duvall]

I think a close reading of the conclusion might help this out a bit. The conclusion doesn't just say swimming during the day v night are equally dangerous. It says the attacks on swimmers during the day indicate that it's not more dangerous to swim at night.

(A) is getting to whether it might be inherently more dangerous to swim at night, not whether the daytime attacks indicate it's not more dangerous at night. (E) gets at the actual conclusion, because if only a few people are swimming at night (and therefore presenting less chance of being attacked) the daytime attacks don't indicate that swimming at night isn't more dangerous.