Q19 - Tanya would refrain

[fch4mat]

Can anyone explain why E is the best answer for this? I believe I got this answer wrong because in my haste, I selected an answer that I thought had the same method of reasoning. I figured out the flaw (or so I think), but can't connect it to E.

Anyone???

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

The flaw in this question is that the argument mistakes "some" for "all." We know that if "everyone else" refrained from littering, then Tanya would refrain from littering as well. We're told that "some people" refrain from littering. And the argument concludes that Tanya will therefore as well.

Clearly, this argument fell short of providing enough evidence to establish the conclusion. Answer choice (E) commits the same error in reasoning, because it switches from "all of a restaurant's customers" to "all of the customers consulted by Sherryl." We don't know how many customers Sherryl consulted. Unspecified amounts are automatically considered to be "some" statements.

(A) might be tempting but this argument is assuming that because the neighbors share some common interests, that they share a specific common interest - not quite.
(B) commits a reversal with the conditional logic. It's an error, but not the same error.
(C) shifts the term from "Herbert will stop selling office supplies" to "those customers will not complain." These terms should have matched in order for answer choice (C) to have been correct.
(D) does have the appropriate switch from "all whales" to "Blue whales," but commits an additional error not committed in the stimulus. Answer choice (D) also commits a reversal of the conditional statement.

I hope that helps, and let me know if you still have questions on this one!

[alinanny]

The explanation above is perfect. I just wanted to add that the first thing that came to my mind when I read this question was the common answer choice "draws a general conclusion based on too small of a sample".