PrepTest 135

[lcid:3636] Prep Test 135 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S1 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

A new process enables Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Valid

Question Type

Argument Structure Questions

Stimulus Summary

Development - Salt can be fortified with iron
Problem - Anemia from iron deficiency
Context - Salt is used throughout the world in quantities high enough to provide significant iron
Conclusion - The new process can help reduce anemia

Answer Anticipation

The argument is all about exploring the impact that a new process could have on a problem - anemia. It starts by describing the process (background) before stating the impact that this process “could” have - in other words, it’s making a prediction about the impact. Predictions tend to be conclusions, and that’s backed up here by the rest of the stimulus explaining how this process could help alleviate anemia. The statement in question is part of that support, so we’re looking for an answer stating that it’s a premise of the argument.

Answer choices

  1. A
    It is the conclusion Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    The conclusion of the argument is that the new process could help alleviate anemia, backed up by the statement in question, so this answer is wrong.
  2. B
    It provides support for Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    This is a long-winded way of saying it’s a premise, so this is our answer.
  3. C
    It is a claim Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    There’s no opposing point or rebuttal structure here, so this answer doesn’t describe any statement in the argument.
  4. D
    It qualifies the conclusion Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Qualifying the conclusion of the argument means, essentially, putting an “if” or a condition on it. Here, there’s no condition for the conclusion - no qualification that the new process will help only if or if we can afford it.
  5. E
    It illustrates a principle Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    The argument doesn’t use an analogous situation to highlight a principle that it uses, which would normally be the case when an argument has something that illustrates a principle that it relies on.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion