Q19 - If the flowers Drew received

[beidounali]

Hello,

I can not figure out why B is the answer. They all seemed wrong to me. Thank you.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

This question is a classic, and has been confusing people preparing for the LSAT for a long time, so don't be overly concerned that it gave you a hard time.

We're asked to weaken the argument here, so let's start by finding the conclusion. The conclusion is that "the florist must have made some sort of mistake." We need to find an answer that undermines the idea that the florist made some sort of mistake.

We know that if the person who sent flowers knew Drew, then that person would have known that Drew prefers violets to roses. We also know that if the person who sent Drew these flowers didn't know Drew, then that person would have sent a card. But no card was sent.

We want an answer that shows how the florist didn't make a mistake. If the person didn't know Drew that person would have sent a card. But no card was sent. So, let's suppose the person did know Drew. In that case the person would have known Drew prefers violets to roses. Why would that person have sent roses then?

Well, one possibility is that there were no violets at the florist shop. Another possibility is that the person knew that Drew doesn't like violets and was trying to upset Drew. Something like this is expressed in the correct answer (B).

(A) tells us that most people send roses when sending flowers, but doesn't address the situation with Drew.
(B) gives a possible explanation for why Drew received violets and no card without the florist making some sort of mistake.
(C) says that person probably knew Drew, but doesn't explain why they sent Drew violets.
(D) says that the florist hasn't made a mistake in the past, but leaves open the possibility that the florist made a mistake this time.
(E) would work, but Drew didn't receive a card. Even if some people who knew Drew have sent cards in the past, this argument specifically says that if the person who sent the flowers did not know Drew, they would have sent a card. This answer choice undermines a piece of evidence but does not undermine the conclusion - which is our goal!

Usually people end up going for either answer choice (A) or (E). Were you also thinking it was either one of these?

[plamming1]

To some extend, I understand the reasoning you gave. However, it seems to me that answer choice D would be viable. If the florist has never made a mistake in the past regarding Drew's flower deliveries, wouldn't this at least somewhat weaken the argument? Additionally, the point that some people do not send flowers to please seems like a weak answer choice, since some could mean only one person, and one person in the world who gives flowers not to please doesn't weaken the argument much. Additionally, we do not know that Drew dislikes violets, so it is not certain that the sender intended for Drew to be upset by them.

I know you didn't write the question, and I hope it doesn't sound like I'm arguing as if you were a proxy for the test writers. I just can't completely wrap my head around why B is superior to D.

[tamwaiman]

To some extend, I understand the reasoning you gave. However, it seems to me that answer choice D would be viable. If the florist has never made a mistake in the past regarding Drew's flower deliveries, wouldn't this at least somewhat weaken the argument?

Hi, in fact, I choose (D) when doing this question, because I have a feeling that it is opposite to sth in the argument. After reviewing I understand (D) attacks one of the premises but not the conclusion, and it doesn't weaken the reasoning.

Additionally, the point that some people do not send flowers to please seems like a weak answer choice, since some could mean only one person, and one person in the world who gives flowers not to please doesn't weaken the argument much. Additionally, we do not know that Drew dislikes violets, so it is not certain that the sender intended for Drew to be upset by them.

Even one person gives flowers which is not Drew's favorite doesn't mean that he/she don't KNOW Drew's preference.
And yes, we do not know whether Drew dislikes violets, but we are informed that IF somebody gives flowers to Drew, THEN he KNOWS Drew's preference, regardless Drew dislike violets or not.

I know you didn't write the question, and I hope it doesn't sound like I'm arguing as if you were a proxy for the test writers. I just can't completely wrap my head around why B is superior to D.

Please help correct me if any mistake. Thanks!!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Great discussion here!

Let me add a few thoughts. The conclusion that the florist must have made some sort of mistake includes three possibilities: Drew was supposed to receive violets, or a card, or these flowers were intended for someone else.

According to answer choice (D), wouldn't the florist still have made a mistake? If the florist has never delivered the wrong flowers, theoretically supporting the claim that the flowers were the correct ones this time, why didn't Drew get a card? He should have. So the florist still made a mistake.

Answer choice (B) however takes the burden off the florist altogether. I know it's weak, but the other tempting answer choices like (A) and (D) still have the florist making a mistake, since the mistake included more than just shipping the correct flowers, but also included shipping them to the correct person and including a card.

What do you guys think?

[LSAT-Chang]

According to answer choice (D), wouldn't the florist still have made a mistake? If the florist has never delivered the wrong flowers, theoretically supporting the claim that the flowers were the correct ones this time, why didn't Drew get a card? He should have. So the florist still made a mistake.

Hi Matt!
Could I also say that answer choice (D) is wrong because you can't say something won't happen in the future because it has never happened in the past?

Like with (D), I thought just because the florist has NEVER delivered the wrong flowers to Drew before in his entire life, we can't try to assume and conclude from this that the florist must have NOT made some sort of mistake THIS TIME (the conclusion we are trying to weaken here). It could totally be possible that this was his first time to make a mistake -- so we can't try to undermine the conclusion by saying that the florist did not make a mistake this time just because he/she has never made a mistake in the past. Would you agree?

[bigtree65]

I had the exact same thought process about why D is wrong Chang. Here is what I really dont understand about this question though. I was really torn between B and E and ended up choosing E because I thought the either or clause in the last sentence: "...either Drew was supposed to receive violets, or a card, or these flowers were intended for someone else." implied that only one of the two options ( flowers or a card) but not both had to exist for the argument to exist. I thought E addressed this issue accurately and broke the argument. Can someone please explain why this is wrong? Does beginning an or statement with "either" not imply that it's a not both statement?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

so we can't try to undermine the conclusion by saying that the florist did not make a mistake this time just because he/she has never made a mistake in the past. Would you agree?

That's exactly right. Assuming that not having made a mistake in the past would support the idea that florist did not make a mistake this time, would itself be an error in reasoning. The error is a temporal flaw in which you assume what is true of the past is true of the present, or will be true of the future.

Can someone please explain why this is wrong? Does beginning an or statement with "either" not imply that it's a not both statement?

That's correct. "Either or" statements do not imply that those terms are mutually exclusive. So if I were to say...

If either the package is damaged in transit or the package is mislabeled, it will not be delivered on time.

According to that statement, if the package is damaged in transit and it is mislabeled, then for sure we know that it will not be delivered on time. Either/or statements are inclusive. However, if I say the phrase "either ___ or else _____" then I would assume exclusivity between the terms being related.

Does that answer your question?

[dean.won]

is c a possible strengthener?

if someone who doesnt know him well is unlikely to send him flowers then it might weaken the possibility of him receiving a card (which he didnt).

thereby strengthening the possibility that he wasnt supposed to receive a card which in turn might support the fact that the florist didnt make a mistake in forgetting to send him a card..??

dont know if that made sense lol
apologies if im way off and just ended up making this more confusing.

[bp0]

This question is strait up INCORRECT and LSAT needs to fix it. I ran into this Sh** with the GMAT where they would make incorrect questions. I chose E because if some people who know drew well have sent him cards along with flowers, it could be argued that people who don't know drew well could know that he prefers violets to roses, as you could infer that he mixed up the argument all together and that would be the opposite side as well.

The fact that some people send flowers for a reason other than the desire to please has NOTHING to do with the argument at hand. The argument says nothing about People's desire to please Drew in the first place. Perhaps, they just send him flowers because it was his birthday and felt obligated?

This questions is UNACCEPTABLE. This test is supposedly for entrance into top Universities and scholarship money that is worth thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in the long run. You have to miss less than 12 to get a 170+. I am not missing a point due to something as dumb as this question.

[tommywallach]

Hey Brian,

Rage aside, this is not an unfair question. The definition of "preference" is that it's something that pleases us more. If you prefer one thing to another, it provides more pleasure. The argument keeps telling us about things that please Brian, assuming that anyone who sent something to him would want to meet his preference (i.e. cater to his pleasure). But if people are sending stuff and they don't care about his pleasure (i.e. his preferences), then they might have sent the wrong thing and it's not the florist's fault.

It's tricky, but it's not wrong. Anyway, it's from PT31. That was years ago!

-t

[bp0]

Tommy,

There is no rage here; however, I do expect to hold the test maker accountable. Accountability is not a one way street and if you are telling me this test is for thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars of future earnings, you better expect I am going to make sure there are questions not like this one on the test. No Excuses. If I miss a question because I simply got it wrong; which, trust me I do, I am fine with that. I can go back and take a look at it and figure out logically if I missed something. However, As I go through the book I have found a few examples of pretty obvious errors on Lsac's part. Anyways back to the question.

I don't know why you are using preference as the word used in the questions is prefer in the context that DREW prefers violets to roses. The definition of prefer is as follows:

1. To choose or be in the habit of choosing as more desirable or as having more value: prefers coffee to tea.
2. Law
a. To give priority or precedence to (a creditor).
b. To file, prosecute, or offer for consideration or resolution before a magistrate, court, or other legal authority: preferred the suit in a higher court.
3. Archaic To recommend for advancement or appointment; promote.

With that being said, even using your definition as something that provides more pleasure, you can prefer something without having it derive more pleasure. A dad of 4 can prefer a Dodge Viper to a Mini van, but perhaps he derives more pleasure from the mini van due to the fact his kids really enjoy it. I could prefer using a sharp knife to a dull knife, yet I am not deriving any pleasure really by choosing one over the other.

The argument says absolutely nothing about pleasing anything or anyone, so I don't understand where you are drawing that reference. So let's take your argument and draw it out even further to elucidate my point: Let's say someone really is sending him flowers for a reason other to please. So what you are saying there is a guy out there with a chip on his shoulder sending drew purple flowers over roses ........... to make him mad? Thus weakening the argument that the florist couldn't have made the mistake?

Do you understand how ridiculously dumb that sounds?? More importantly, do you know how ridiculously dumb that sounds that THAT is part of the major reason why Law schools would choose a person over another? Over questions such as the one above? Because the difference between a 169 and a 170 is pretty marginal and apparently that is the cutoff rate for the very top schools.

Now let's take a step back and take a look at E) the fact that some people who know drew will have sent drew cards along with flowers.
I would argue you could specifically say that statement takes one of the original statements of the paragraph and says that it is wrong. Couldn't that imply that maybe the author of the paragraph got BOTH main statements wrong? In fact, logically wouldn't that be an inference that you could make? If the author got the first statement completely wrong, couldn’t you make the assumption that the second statement could be wrong? If I came up and lied to you for example, a blatant obvious lie, and then tried to tell you something else, you would probably be pretty skeptical about anything else I would tell you, wouldn't you Tommy?

[tommywallach]

Don't know what to say. I definitely think you're wrong, but you clearly feel strongly. My take is that it's just this simple:

Steve bought Sandy a pet. If he knew her well, he would have bought her a dog, because she likes dogs, so he must not know her well.

This argument assumes that Steve cares about what Sandy actually prefers. He might just have sent her a pet because he had an extra one, not because he wanted to make her happy.

That's all that's going on with this question, and I think it's fair enough.

Anyway, one question doesn't get you in or out of law school. Even if you think this question is broken, you're not going to see many of these on a test, if any at all. So the LSAT still works!

Good luck on the rest of the test!

-t

[bp0]

Tommy,

First of all thank you for your thoughts, I appreciate the time you spend responding to my posts and I always enjoy hearing your perspective. I get what you are saying; however, from my perspective, I guess I just disagree for reasons listed above. I could see how someone could narrow it down to two here and easily choose the second one by logically making an inference about the author.

My final point was simple- You can only miss 12 points to get a 170+. I am right at that mark, probably because some of the GMAT studying I did carries over. That is fine, I know we cant review those questions after the exam because they do not give them back. I take issue with this for an obvious reason - it takes the accountability mechanism of test taking out. Therefore, I am going to play the accountability game on prior tests and compile a list of questions that I think are logically inconsistent. At the very least it will give me more practice to be sharper on the questions. Trust me, some of the ones I thought were initially wrong I took a second look at and realized I made the mistake. I just don't think that is the case with this question.

[tommywallach]

Hey Bp,

I hear ya. Just to respond to your actual argument, there are many reasons you would send flowers to someone without considering their flower preferences. Sometimes, just the gesture of flowers is enough on its own.

I too have seen questions I don't like, but I've yet to see one where there is a BETTER answer than the right one. And I DEFINITELY think that's the case here. Even when I've seen questions where I hate the correct answer, I can't then find a better answer. Sometimes, that's the best you can hope for. : )

-t

[bp0]

Tommy,

Ok fair enough. Although, I would say that better answer is somewhat subjective. Sorry, you are an Lsat tutor .... you have to expect a little bit of friendly argument from time to time.

Sincerely,

BP

[tommywallach]

I love it! That's what makes the forums fun!

-t

[pewals13]

I think answer choice (B) provides an alternative explanation consistent with the conditional statements present in the stimulus. You already know that because there was no card the flowers could not have been sent by someone who does not know Drew well (via the contrapositive). Answer choice (B) appears to open up the door to the flowers having been sent by someone who knew Drew well by indicating that a known preference isn't always followed. This weakens the strength of that particular premise thereby making the conclusion less likely.

[cyt5015]

Why answer E undermines the premise? I don't see any contradiction. Answer E satisfy the necessary condition of premise 2, so does not trigger anything. I eliminate E because it has no effect on the conclusion by describing a past event. please help. thank you.

[ohthatpatrick]

I think you're exactly right.

(E) doesn't go against anything in the argument. It's perfectly compatible with the two conditionals.

And it's just telling us about something in the past, so it's not going to help us argue anything about whether or not THIS current delivery was a mistake.