17. (C)
Question Type: Identify a Flaw
The author’s argument gives a correlation (Sirat Bani Hilal is sung. Sirat Bani Hilal is still publicly performed.) and then draws a causal relationship between these facts (Because Sirat Bani Hilal is sung, it is still publicly performed). This is a classic correlation vs. causation logical error, which answer (C) identifies.
(A) uses confusing language to throw you off. Cutting through the noise, it claims that the evidence (that Sirat Bani Hilal is still publicly performed and is usually sung) is impossible to verify. This is not the greatest vulnerability of the argument.
(B) also picks on the source of the evidence. A source for the evidence presented (that Sirat Bani Hilal is still publicly performed and is usually sung) is not even mentioned. This is not the greatest vulnerability of the argument.
(D) claims that the author uses an opinion as fact. This answer asserts that the supporting evidence (that Sirat Bani Hilal is still publicly performed and is usually sung) is an opinion, not a fact. This does not appear to be the case, and is clearly not the greatest vulnerability of the argument.
(E) again uses confusing language to attempt to throw you off. Don’t be fooled _ the logical reasoning error mentioned in (E) is a classic one for the LSAT, but is not the error at work here. In order for (E) to be correct, the argument would have needed to be:
The poem has been sung, and this is the reason why the poem is still performed
Therefore, any poem that is still performed is a poem that is sung.
In this case, the order of the logic has been reversed, which is another way of saying that a sufficient condition has been confused with a necessary condition. This is NOT what happens in the original argument.
#officialexplanation