[Lina]

Hi all-

I am seriously stuck on understanding the right answer to this question. Perhaps I am just not getting the wording here. I initially chose B, thinking that it was the answer most directly related to the conclusion and the support– that the people who attribute the plays to other authors are motivated by snobbery, evidenced (weakly) by the fact that they are descendants of aristocrats. The problem with answer B seems to be that it’s making an inference about the claims of the descendants– that they’re based on legitimate historical evidence (we don’t know that?).

But answer D is worded in such an odd way, I think it’s saying the opposite of what I want it to say. “Fails to exclude the possibility that there might be legitimate evidence motivating those who reject Shakespeare’s authorship.” If the word “exclude” were changed to “include,” the answer would make perfect sense to me. As it stands, I don’t understand how D is the correct answer!

Thanks for reading,
Lina

[LSAT Dan]

I think you’re reading “exclude” and considering “include” as pertaining to evidence in the passage, rather than “the possibility.” Think of “exclude” as synonymous with “rule out.”

The flaw in the passage is that the author has just jumped on one possibility, with tunnel vision. Is it possible that they’re motivated by snobbery? Sure. Are they’re other, legitimate possibilities? Again, Sure. And the problem with the argument is that it doesn’t *exclude* (rule out) those possibilities.