PrepTest 156

[lcid:3721] Prep Test 156 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Business writer: Although the 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.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Strategy Overview

Identify the conclusion Identify the premise Determine the role played by the statement from the question stem.
For example...
Premise Main conclusion Premise/conclusion
Find the answer choice that correctly expresses the role

Answer Anticipation

On an Argument Structure question, an experienced test-taker will first thoroughly deconstruct and understand the entire argument in the passage. Even though our job is to understand the role of the statement in the question stem, the benefits of understanding the whole argument are twofold. First, trying to figure out the role of the statement-in-question too early and without considering the entire argument can sometimes bias us and lead to an incorrect determination. Second, many answer choices will require us to know the roles of multiple propositions. (For instance, if the statement-in-question is a premise/conclusion, we'll probably also need to know which premise supports the premise/conclusion and which conclusion the premise/conclusion supports.) So, let's break down the business writer's entire argument, starting with the conclusion. The second part of the first sentence, which uses the tonal word "mistake," is the main conclusion. So, the conclusion asserts that increasing the supply of Corinne watches would be a mistake. The business writer supports this conclusion with several premises, further proving that the second part of the first sentence is the conclusion. If necessary, we can use the "Why?" test to confirm that these premises support the main conclusion. To use that test, we ask, "Why is it true that increasing the supply of Corinne watches would be a mistake?" Then, we say "Because ..." and insert the passage's other statements. "Why is it true that increasing the supply of Corinne watches would be a mistake? Because the excess demand results from the belief that the watches are in short supply. But the short supply merely results from the limited number of watches made. The demand makes people believe that others really want the watches. This belief makes people desire the watches more. And if Corinne increased the supply, the demand would be eliminated, and people wouldn't desire the watches." That paragraph sounds like a cogent and easy-to-follow argument. That confirms that the statements that follow "Because ..." are premises. It also confirms that the part that follows "Why?" is the conclusion. (Technically, the last statement in the paragraph is a premise/conclusion. It would also pass the "Why?" test with the other premises: "Why is it true that if Corinne increased the supply, the demand would be eliminated, and people wouldn't desire the watches? Because the excess demand results from the belief that the watches are in short supply. But the short supply merely results from the limited number of watches made. The demand makes people believe that others really want the watches. This belief makes people desire the watches more.") Now that we have broken down the entire argument, we can determine the role the statement-in-question serves. The statement-in-question is the second part of the first sentence. As we determined, that statement is the argument's main conclusion. Let's look for an answer choice that says that.

Answer choices

  1. A
    an introductory claim that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    Nope. The business writer doesn't refute the statement-in-question. The business writer believes that statement is true and tries to support that statement with premises! Next!

  2. B
    a justification of the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    No. A "justification of the relevance of the evidence cited" would function like a premise, as it would indirectly support the main conclusion by showing why other pieces of evidence support the conclusion. Of course, we determined that the statement-in-question is the main conclusion, not a premise. Next!

  3. C
    a premise of the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    Nuh-uh. We figured out that the statement-in-question is not a premise but the main conclusion. The rest of the statements in the business writer's argument attempt to explain why the statement-in-question is true. Next!

  4. D
    an opinion offered in Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    Negative. An "opinion offered in support of one of the argument's premises" would function like a premise, as it would indirectly support the main conclusion by showing why one of the argument's premises is true. (It would also make "one of the argument's premises" a premise/conclusion, technically.) But, we determined that the statement-in-question is the main conclusion, not a premise. Next!

  5. E
    the conclusion toward which Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem

    Finally, this answer choice matches our anticipation. The statement-in-question is the business writer's main conclusion — or the "conclusion toward which the argument is directed." We can select this and move on to the next question.

Discussion

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

View all discussions Start a discussion