PrepTest 112

[lcid:3544] Prep Test 112 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S1 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Company policy: An employee 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

Facts

Valid or Flawed

NA

Question Type

Cannot Be True Questions

Stimulus Summary

Employee at company → Treat everyone (including family) equally

Answer Anticipation

The question stem asks us to find an answer that “violates” the company policy. Violating a policy means breaking it - so the correct answer should have someone acting in a manner that contradicts the rule. When we’re dealing with contradictions, we’re in a Cannot be True question.
The rule here is pretty straightforward - treat everyone equally in all aspects of the job. Thus, in this Cannot be True question, let’s find an answer where someone treats a family member differently than others.

Answer choices

  1. A
    refusing to hire any Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    This answer can feel weird to select, but it does show someone treating their family members differently. If the applicants weren’t family members yet were the most qualified, they would certainly be hired. Here, they aren’t because they’re family members. Thus, this action violates the company policy, and thus this is the correct answer.
  2. B
    receiving over a hundred Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    The mother here is treated the same as everyone else who complained, so this answer follows the policy.
  3. C
    never firing a family Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    This answer can seem to describe a situation where family members are getting special treatment, but there’s no indication that these family members did anything to deserve being fired, or that they’ve done something that resulted in another employee being fired. As such, there’s no indication that these family members are being given special treatment, and thus we can’t conclude that it violates the policy.
  4. D
    repeatedly refusing to advance Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    There’s no family member here. Also, there’s no indication that others who had similarly distant infractions were advanced, so there’s no evidence this person was treated differently.
  5. E
    promoting a family member Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    The argument would need to establish that the family member was promoted in a way that showed special treatment. If that family member deserved the promotion, then there was no special treatment.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion