PrepTest 136

[lcid:3643] Prep Test 136 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

University president: Research institutions Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

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

Question Type

Must Be True Questions / Principle Questions

Answer choices

  1. A
    A university denies a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Incorrect. The principle in the stimulus can justify only supporting research, not denying support, so this answer can be eliminated.
  2. B
    A government agency funds Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Incorrect. There's no indication that this research would have any impact on the quality of life of people, so the conclusion isn't justified by this principle as it doesn't match the sufficient condition.
  3. C
    A university funds a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Incorrect. This answer is about funding a position, not research, so it's out of scope.
  4. D
    A foundation decides not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. The principle in the stimulus can justify only supporting research, not denying support, so this answer can be eliminated.
  5. E
    A research institute funds Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem
    Correct. Argument or Facts:
    Facts

    Question Type:
    Must Be True (Principle)

    Stimulus Summary:
    Research shows promise of addressing practical problems of everyday life → Research institution should promote that research

    Answer Anticipation:
    There's not much to this stimulus—it's a conditional ("if that . . . ") that justifies promoting research as a research institution. After getting the diagram down, we should head straight to the answers to see which one presents the sufficient condition and concludes the necessary condition. And remember—we can only justify a conclusion that appears as a necessary condition (since it's what we have a sufficient condition for—something that's enough to prove it), so any answer about not promoting research as a conclusion is right out.

    It's also important to note that the contrapositive probably won't be a factor here, as it's unlikely an argument will present premises about whether a research institution shouldn't promote research and conclude that it therefore must not show promise, but it's possible.

    Answer Explanation:
    This answer justifies research based on the likelihood that it'll help understand the cause of some diseases, which definitely affect people's "quality of life." This is, therefore, our answer.

    Key Takeaway:
    For Must Be True (Principle) questions, always have what conclusion(s) can be justified top of mind. Answers that can't be justified with the given principle generally make up 2-3 of the wrong answers, so you can get some quick eliminations that way.

What this tests

Discussion

  • A vs. E 4 replies

    Started by ikarus