Another common example of bad LSAT arguments is the fallacy of correlation vs. cause and effect.  This fallacy occurs when something is identified as the cause of an event, but it has not actually been shown to be the cause.  This fallacy is included in the many forms of LSAT arguments we cover in our LSAT preparation materials.  It is also a common area where students get tripped up.

(This is Part 3 of a series of blog posts on bad LSAT arguments.  Please read Part 1 and Part 2.)

Correlation = Causation = Bad LSAT Arguments

Consider this example:

Whenever I wear my lucky hat, the Yankees always win. Therefore, my lucky hat is causing the Yankees to win.

Obviously, although there is a correlation between me wearing my lucky hat and the Yankees winning, it is very unlikely that my hat has mystical properties that cause the Yankees to win.

This logical flaw is very common on the LSAT, particularly on questions asking you to weaken or strengthen an argument.  Here is another made-up example of this fallacy:

A researcher has determined that, among students who used computers in school last year, those who also owned Ipads scored 30 percent higher on their exams on average than those who did not.  Therefore, it is obvious that owning an Ipad led to a higher exam score

Here, the argument assumes that the correlation between an Ipad and a high exam score is caused by the Ipad. However, it could just as easily be true that people with high exam scores are more likely to have an Ipad to meet the demands of school. Thus, the conclusion is not supported by these premises alone.

When dealing with cause-and-effect relationships on the LSAT, you may be dealing with bad LSAT arguments . . . .

Be very careful on the LSAT when dealing with cause and effect relationships. Very frequently, the argument will conclude that a cause and effect relationship has been established when only a correlation has been established. Always be critical of cause and effect relationships because there is almost always another cause that can be the actual cause of the effect described.

Of course, there are many different logical fallacies on the LSAT. This blog series on bad LSAT arguments (including Part 1 and Part 2) only examines a few of them. For a more comprehensive review of these logical fallacies, check out LSAT Freedom’s logical fallacies e-book, which covers all of the common bad LSAT arguments on the exam.

If you haven’t joined our community by LIKING LSAT Freedom on Facebook, you’re missing out on half the fun! Our Facebook page is the perfect place to ask LSAT questions and get answers directly from our instructors. Also, be sure to check out our LSAT prep course, which was created and taught exclusively by Harvard Law School graduates.