Is it meaningful to be able to match the primary flaw with the language FAILS TO CONSIDER versus TAKES FOR GRANTED? They are obviously two sides of the same coin, and it often seems arbitrary to select one over the other (e.g. LSAT TRAINER p. 75, Scenario 3, Section 1: could be FAILS TO CONSIDER that the employee could be disgruntled because of the mayor’s illegal campaign connection or TAKES FOR GRANTED that an unreliable motive produces an unreliable conclusion). Do I need to learn which in order to better identify the flaws? ( I found it easy to identify the flaws but impossible to match FTC and TFG.)