PrepTest 135

[lcid:3639] Prep Test 135 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Critic to economist: In Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

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

Argument or Facts

Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed/Flawed

Question Type

Methods of Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

C2E: You predicted that, if policy didn’t change, there’d be a recession. But the economy was stronger, so your prediction was bad.
E: Those predictions resulted in policy changes, so my prediction wasn’t bumbling.

Answer Anticipation

The Economist brings in a new piece of information that the Critic didn’t address - the changes made to economic policy as a result of the predictions of the economist. Even the Critic admits that the Economist’s prediction of a recession was conditioned on there being no changes to current economic policies (“if current economic policies were not changed”). So the Economist’s response relies on pointing out that the condition under which her prediction would hold didn’t happen, and so the booming economy isn’t evidence against the prediction.

Answer choices

  1. A
    indicating that the state Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    This is a mouthful, but it talks about a condition on the Economist’s prediction, so let’s try to map the ideas from the stimulus onto this answer to see if it makes sense. First, what states of affairs was the prediction conditioned on? Economic policy not changing. Does the Economist’s response establish that that condition didn’t happen? Sure does! This is the correct answer - the Economist responds by showing that her prediction’s precondition for applying to the situation didn’t happen, and so that prediction shouldn’t have come true.
  2. B
    distinguishing between a prediction Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    The time period for the prediction has already happened, so this answer doesn’t apply. (It also in no way describes the Economists response.)
  3. C
    attempting to show that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    There are no accusations of internal inconsistency or contradictions. If the economy were booming and there were no changes to policy, the Critic’s criticism would make sense. Instead, the Economist points out that the precondition for the prediction wasn’t met, which is different than pointing out an inconsistency.
  4. D
    offering a particular counterexample Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Both speakers only talk about the economy over a given, short time period, so neither is making a generalization.
  5. E
    offering evidence against one Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    The Economist doesn’t debate the substance of her prediction or the current state of the economy, which are the two factual premises of the Critic’s argument. Instead, she brings up a consideration not considered by the Critic.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion