Logical reasoning PrepTest 133 · Section 3 · Question 7

Incorrect. While there's less competition for these businesses supplying new technologies, there's no indication that this leads to a higher likelihood of prospering. It's possible that only one of the companies will end up developing the technology that gets adopted by all businesses, and the rest go out of business, resulting in a relatively low success rate for these companies.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
Economic growth causes increased demand for new tech. Few businesses supply it, but many demand it. But both types of businesses can go bankrupt.

Answer Anticipation:
This very much seems like a scenario where the correct answer is going to generalize from the scenario to say that economic growth can have certain impacts.

Many times, when an effect of what seems like a positive change is negative, that counterintuitive outcome is highlighted in the correct answer—its counterintuitive nature making it harder to spot. Here, economic growth can drive demand for new technologies, but the companies supplying these technologies sometimes fail. Since that's unexpected but supported by the stimulus, let's see if it shows up as an answer.

Answer Explanation:
This answer is a weak generalization ("may not always") derived from the situation in the stimulus. There, it's noted that economic growth can accelerate demand for new technologies, which can cause suppliers of these technologies to fail. So there are some instances where businesses supplying new technologies fail because of economic growth, justifying this answer.

Key Takeaway:
Some Must Be True questions describe a scenario, and the correct answer doesn't infer from the statements but rather generalizes from them. When this happens, the generalization has to be weak—something "can" or "might" happen—as a too-strong generalization wouldn't be supported by a single example/situation.

Additionally, when an outcome discussed in a Must Be True stimulus is counterintuitive or unexpected, then there's a good chance that it will be featured in the correct answer. The counterintuitive nature of that statement "hides" the answer, increasing the difficulty of the question, and the LSAT loves making questions harder!

Incorrect. This answer reverses the relationship from the first sentence, so it's unsupported.

Incorrect. This answer is the reverse of (A) and is wrong for similar reasons. The stimulus doesn't discuss the likelihood that any specific type of business will prosper, so any answer bringing up the relative likelihood of prospering is out of scope.

Incorrect. While economic growth can contribute to some businesses failing, there's no indication that the rate of this business failure is higher than it would be during a time of economic stagnation or decline. That comparison is unsupported.