Logical reasoning PrepTest 153 · Section 3 · Question 9

Incorrect. Strong Could Be True answer, especially if the town is short on eager political volunteers, but it's not stated in the stimulus so it can't possibly be the conclusion.

Incorrect. This is a premise of the argument. We can't pay people, THEREFORE we need volunteers.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Main Point

Stimulus Summary:
A political organizer bemoans that their candidate will only have a shot at winning IF 30 volunteers are assembled. That's because IF she wins, THEN the public is fully informed about her record. And IF the public is to be fully informed, THEN 30 people must campaign. However, the campaign can't afford to pay people (hence, volunteers).

Answer Anticipation:
The organizer states their conclusion neatly up-front (as many speakers tend to on the LSAT): the campaign will need 30 volunteers to have a shot at winning. You can diagram the rest of this if you'd like, although more advanced students won't need to. It leads to the same thing: IF she can win, THEN at least 30 people campaigned for her, and we know that the only people who can campaign for her are volunteers, since the campaign can't pay.

Answer Explanation:
Exactly as we anticipated: she's gonna need 30 volunteers in order to have a shot at whatever office she's running for. Get busy recruiting, organizer.

Key Takeaway:
On Main Point questions, don't be afraid of conclusions in the first sentence of the stimulus. That's often where speakers put their conclusions. Think about how you talk in casual conversation. If you're like most people, you often voice your opinion first, then back it up with support. "I'm going to order the cheese pizza, because this place has lousy pepperoni." "I'm not going to my family's reunion. It would be expensive and I hate family gatherings." "You shouldn't take Dr. Thelwell's Legal Writing class. I took it last year and he was terrible, and the same class is available Tuesdays with a much better professor."

Incorrect. This is a conditional premise of the argument, which supports the conclusion that she needs 30 volunteers.

Incorrect. This is another conditional premise of the argument, supporting the conclusion that she needs 30 volunteers to have a chance at winning.