Logical Reasoning · Principle

PrepTest 142 · Section 4 · Question 21

Phase 1 (your first ~400 questions): read the guidance, then answer. No clock.

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type

Principle

The one idea it tests

Doubting a wild claim more than an ordinary one, from the same reliable person, is not unfair bias if wild claims need stronger proof.

The basic logic

The argument says: treating two claims differently is bias. Find the principle that would make the different treatment reasonable. That principle clashes with the argument's conclusion. Think 'bigger claims need bigger proof'.

Tiny words that decide it

“unless”
“should not”
“despite”

Playground logic

Frankie says Sharon is unfair: she doubted Tommy's claim of eating forty pancakes, but would have believed him about eating four (patty), even though Tommy is honest (more patty). So Sharon is biased (top bun). A rule that unusual claims need unusual proof would say Sharon was being sensible, not biased.

Step 2 · The kid story

Forty Pancakes

Tommy announced at recess, 'I ate forty pancakes at breakfast.' Sharon folded her arms. 'Forty? Show me some proof.' Frankie jumped in, as usual. 'That is so unfair, Sharon! Tommy never lies. He told us he found Mr. Whiskers on the roof, and he did. If Tommy said he ate four pancakes, you would just believe him. So you are biased against Tommy.' Sharon shook her head. 'I am not biased against Tommy. I am biased against forty pancakes. Four is normal. Forty is a world record. A normal claim from an honest kid, I believe. A world-record claim needs more than his word, even from an honest kid.' Priya sipped her juice box. 'Both of you have a point, but Sharon has a rule.' Tommy burped. Everyone took that as partial evidence.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Frankie: Sharon doubted Tommy's claim that he ate forty pancakes, even though Tommy has always been honest. If Tommy had claimed to eat four pancakes, Sharon would have believed him right away. So Sharon is unfairly biased.

Frankie's reasoning goes against which one of these principles?

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Talking Parrot Witness

Mr. Whitfield objected. 'Your Honor, the opposing lawyer believed Mrs. Tran when she said her parrot knows ten words, but now doubts her when she says it recited a whole poem. Mrs. Tran is the most honest woman on her street. That is bias!' Judge Okafor shook her head. 'Counselor, it is not bias. Ten words is ordinary for a parrot. A whole poem is astonishing. The court applies a simple rule: the more astonishing the claim, the more proof it needs, no matter how honest the witness. Bring a recording.' Mr. Whitfield sighed. The parrot, perched in the gallery, said 'Objection,' which did not help.

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 142, Section 4, Question 21 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

State the argument's conclusion in your own words: different treatment equals unfair bias. Then ask what rule would make the different treatment fair. Read each principle and look for one that, if followed, explains why the two claims deserve different levels of doubt. That is the conflict. Skip principles about sources or confirmations that the argument never raises.