Question #1570

Persons v. Planning Committee Members

Started by Gisell-Landrian · started 2019-05-23 00:55 · last activity 2019-05-23 16:28 · 2 replies

I eliminated answer choice (E) because it states "persons" as opposed to planning committee members. I thought I was supposed to avoid making assumptions outside of the information provided in the stimulus. I understand why (E) is correct, any tips to avoid making the same mistake? Why was I wrong in eliminating (E)?

Replies

  1. Ravi · 2019-05-23 16:26

    @Gisell-Landrian, Happy to help. (E) says, "Some persons with significant financial interests in the planning committee's decisions do not live in the suburbs." This is the inference that we get from combining the first two statements of the stimulus, which are 1) PCM - some - SFI 2) PCM - >Don't LIS Combining these, we get that some people with significant financial interests in the planning committee's decisions don't live in the suburbs SFI - some - Don't LIS You're right—on the LSAT, we're not supposed to make assumptions outside of the information provided in the stimulus. However, we're not doing that with this question. It's totally reasonable for us to assume that everyone who is on the planning committee is a person. In doing so, we know that there are some people who have a significant financial interest in the committee's decisions. We also know that some of these people don't live in the suburbs. Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any other questions!

  2. Gisell-Landrian · 2019-05-23 16:28

    Yes it does make sense. I may have just been overthinking it, thank you for clarifying!

Sign in to reply.