PrepTest 156

[lcid:3723] Prep Test 156 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

I promised Bernie that 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

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Strategy Overview

Argument or facts? Always argument, so identify premises and conclusions of argument Anticipate why the premises are not enough to show that the conclusion is true

Answer Anticipation

On Strengthen with a Sufficient Premise questions, we need to find the answer choice that would make the conclusion valid if added as another premise. Before figuring that out, we'll first need to identify the premises and conclusion. Fortunately, they're not trying to hide this conclusion in this argument. The conclusion is the last sentence, introduced by the conclusion word "Thus." However, it helps to figure out what the author's promise was. The first sentence provides some insight — the author promised to answer Bernie's question. So, it's best to think of this conclusion as "I answered Bernie's question." The author's premises are in the second, third, and fourth sentences. Bernie asked whether his project was approved. The author misinterpreted that statement, thinking Bernie asked whether the author approved the project. The author clarified that they don't have the authority to approve the project, but the person with that authority, Dorothy, hadn't approved it yet. And this is where the question gets confusing for most test-takers. Where's the gap in this argument? Often, the gap occurs when the author introduces a new idea in the conclusion. But there's nothing new in this conclusion. We know what Bernie's question was, and we know how the author answered it. Still, there must be something wrong with this argument. Some test-takers can to identify the gap and anticipate what the correct answer will say. However, most test-takers will probably need to resort to the backup plan. To execute the backup plan on Strengthen with a Sufficient Premise questions, we'll start by re-reading the premises. Then, we'll say, "Plus," and read an answer choice. Finally, we'll say, "So, it's definitely true that ..." and re-read this argument's conclusion. If that argument makes sense, we'll know the answer choice expresses a sufficient premise. If the argument doesn't make much sense, then we can cross that answer choice off. Here's a simplified template we can use for this backup plan (note that we simplified the premises and conclusion):
"Bernie asked me whether his project had been approved. "I misunderstood and thought he had asked whether I had approved it. "I said, truthfully, 'I would approve it if I could. But I don’t have the authority to approve it. Dorothy has the authority to approve it. She hasn't made a decision yet.' "Plus, [answer choice]. "So, it's definitely true that I answered Bernie's question."

Answer choices

  1. A
    All there is to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem

    If we identified the gap in this argument, we could confidently pick this answer choice. The gap in the argument occurs when the author says they "misunderstood" the question. They eventually answered Bernie's real question, but the situation poses an unresolved issue: Can you truly answer a question if you misunderstood it? This answer choice resolves that issue. Answering a question only involves supplying the questioner with the information they asked for. So, it doesn't matter that the author misunderstood the question. They gave Bernie the requested information, thus answering Bernie's question.

    Alternatively, this is the argument we'd make if we used the backup plan:

    "Bernie asked me whether his project had been approved. I misunderstood and thought he had asked whether I had approved it. I said, truthfully, 'I would approve it if I could. But I don’t have the authority to approve it. Dorothy has the authority to approve it. She hasn't made a decision yet.' Plus, all there is to answering a question is giving the questioner the information requested. So, it's definitely true that I answered Bernie's question."

    This makes sense! Bernie asked the question, and the author supplied the requested information. If answering a question only requires giving the requested information, then it's definitely true that the author answered Bernie's question.

    Whichever approach we used, we can be confident that (A) is the correct answer. We can justifiably select it and advance to the following question.

  2. B
    No person can be Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    This is irrelevant to the argument. The conclusion isn't about whether the author should be accountable for Dorothy's decisions or anything like that. So, this definitely won't make the argument valid. We can eliminate it.

    Alternatively, this is the argument we'd make if we used the backup plan:

    "Bernie asked me whether his project had been approved. I misunderstood and thought he had asked whether I had approved it. I said, truthfully, 'I would approve it if I could. But I don’t have the authority to approve it. Dorothy has the authority to approve it. She hasn't made a decision yet.' Plus, no person can be held accountable for another person’s decisions. So, it's definitely true that I answered Bernie's question."

    This doesn't make any sense. The part that follows "Plus" doesn't have anything to do with the statements that come before or after it. The insertion of that claim makes this sound like a digressive and confusing paragraph.

    No matter which approach we use, we can confidently cross off (B).

  3. C
    The person responsible for Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    This is irrelevant to the author's argument. Bernie didn't ask if the author could explain why the project wasn't approved. Bernie just wanted to know whether the project was approved. So, this answer choice doesn't make the argument valid. We can eliminate it.

    Alternatively, this is the argument we'd make if we used the backup plan:

    "Bernie asked me whether his project had been approved. I misunderstood and thought he had asked whether I had approved it. I said, truthfully, 'I would approve it if I could. But I don’t have the authority to approve it. Dorothy has the authority to approve it. She hasn't made a decision yet.' Plus, the person responsible for a decision is the one who should explain the decision. So, it's definitely true that I answered Bernie's question."

    This doesn't make any sense. The part that follows "Plus" has nothing to do with the statements that come before or after it. The insertion of that claim makes this argument sound strange and confusing.

    No matter which approach we use, we can confidently cross off (C).

  4. D
    One need not fulfill Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    This is a confusingly worded answer choice, so it may help to translate it into a simple sentence. Here are a few translations you could go with: "Doing the best you can to fulfill a promise doesn't require you to fulfill the promise"; "You don't need to fulfill a promise to do the best job you could have done"; "You can do your best to fulfill a promise without fulfilling the promise."

    No matter how we slice it, this answer choice applies to people who did not fulfill a promise. It would only help out people who are unable to fulfill a promise but argue that they did the best they could have done. Therefore, it won't help out the author, who concludes that they did fulfill their promise to Bernie. So, we can cross off (D).

    Alternatively, this is the argument we'd make if we used the backup plan:

    "Bernie asked me whether his project had been approved. I misunderstood and thought he had asked whether I had approved it. I said, truthfully, 'I would approve it if I could. But I don’t have the authority to approve it. Dorothy has the authority to approve it. She hasn't made a decision yet.' Plus, one need not fulfill a promise in order to do the best that could be done to fulfill it. So, it's definitely true that I answered Bernie's question."

    This doesn't make any sense. The part that follows "Plus" has nothing to do with the statements before or after it. The statements that come before and after the "Plus" statement don't discuss whether the author did "the best that could be done" to answer Bernie's question. So, the insertion of the claim that follows "Plus" makes it hard to follow this argument's logic.

    No matter which approach we use, we can confidently cross off (D).

  5. E
    Making a promise always Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    This doesn't make the conclusion valid. This answer choice just establishes that the author has an obligation to answer Bernie's question. That doesn't prove that the author did answer Bernie's question. So, we can eliminate (E).

    Alternatively, this is the argument we'd make if we used the backup plan:

    "Bernie asked me whether his project had been approved. I misunderstood and thought he had asked whether I had approved it. I said, truthfully, 'I would approve it if I could. But I don’t have the authority to approve it. Dorothy has the authority to approve it. She hasn't made a decision yet.' Plus, making a promise always obliges a person to keep it. So, it's definitely true that I answered Bernie's question."

    This doesn't make any sense. The part that follows "Plus" doesn't relate to the statements that come before or after it. The statements before and after the "Plus" statement don't discuss whether the author is obligated to answer Bernie's question, so the "Plus" claim makes this argument sound nonsensical.

    No matter which approach we use, we can confidently cross off (E).

Discussion

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

View all discussions Start a discussion