PrepTest 132

[lcid:3625] Prep Test 132 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Legal commentator: The goal 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

Cannot Be True Questions

Answer choices

  1. A
    The law will be Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Incorrect. It's possible that the law will be misinterpreted compared to its intention—the legislators who supported it may have intended it to apply to people working in the houses of others!
  2. B
    Supporters of the law Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Incorrect. Not only is this not contradicted, but it seems in keeping with the stated goal.
  3. C
    The law offers no Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Incorrect. The law is targeted at workplaces and can't be interpreted to apply to homes, and this answer is in keeping with that.
  4. D
    Most people believe that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. The beliefs of the public are out of scope of this argument, and things that are out of scope aren't contradicted.
  5. E
    The law will protect Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem
    Correct. Argument or Facts:
    Facts

    Question Type:
    Cannot Be True

    Stimulus Summary:
    Goal—Protect employees from secondhand smoke
    Approach/Legislation—Ban smoking in workplace
    Problem—It's written so that people can't be barred from smoking in their own home

    Answer Anticipation:
    This Cannot Be True question requires us to find an answer that's contradicted by the stimulus. And with the way it's structured, and with the requirements that we find an answer contradicting the statement, our money's on that last statement being the one that we should focus on.

    First, let's make sure we understand it, because it's written in an unbelievably convoluted manner. Getting rid of the double negatives in there, it states that the law can't stop someone from smoking in their own home. So while official places of business have a smoking ban, a residence doesn't.

    However, the Commentator states this as if it's an issue for the legislation in achieving its goal of protecting employees from secondhand smoke—after all, she pivots from that goal to this statement ("But . . . "). How could smoking at home create a problem for employees?

    Well, it must be the case that some people work in other people's homes. This makes sense: contractors, plumbers, housekeepers, nannies—they all work in someone else's home. Since we're looking for a contradicted answer, it'll probably establish something about this group being protected.

    Answer Explanation:
    Domestic workers by definition work in someone else's home, and the law can't be interpreted to apply there, so it can't protect these workers in their workplaces. This answer is contradicted by the information in the stimulus and is thus correct.

    Key Takeaway:
    First, make sure that you understand convoluted statements in the stimulus—they were written in that way for a reason, and that reason is probably to confuse you away from the correct answer. Second, don't forget that Cannot Be True questions have correct answers that contradict the stimulus—not answers that are unsupported or out of scope.

What this tests

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.