PrepTest 112

[lcid:3546] Prep Test 112 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Vague laws set vague 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

Question Type

Strengthen with Sufficient Premise Questions / Sufficient & Necessary Questions

Stimulus Summary

Vague laws → Vague limits → ~Know if action is legal
Therefore - Vague laws → ~Feel secure

Answer Anticipation

Strengthen with Sufficient Premise questions will frequently introduce a new concept in the conclusion, and our task is to connect that term to a concept established in the premises.
Here, the conclusion is about vague laws preventing people from feeling secure. The stimulus does discuss vague laws, but not a feeling of security, so the correct answer should connect what we can conclude about vague laws based on the premises to not feeling secure.
In the premises, it’s established that vague laws set vague limits on freedom, which in turn makes it impossible to know if an action is legal. So we can conclude that vague laws make it impossible to know if an action is legal.
Therefore, the correct answer should connect that to the new term in the conclusion (or its contrapositive):
~Know if action is legal → ~Feel secure
Feel secure → Know if action is legal

Answer choices

  1. A
    People can feel secure Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    Feel secure → Know if action is legal. This answer matches the contrapositive in our Anticipation. If knowing for certain that an action is legal is a requirement for feeling secure, then vague laws prevent a requirement for feeling secure - and thus guarantee people won’t feel secure. This answer justifies the conclusion, so it’s correct.
  2. B
    If people do not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    This answer is too weak - the conclusion is that under vague laws people “cannot” feel secure, so this answer stating that they “might not” doesn’t justify it.
  3. C
    If people know for Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Know if action is legal → Feel secure. This answer is the illegal negation of the answer we’re looking for. The stimulus establishes that vague laws make it impossible to know whether an action is legal, so this answer doesn’t apply to the situation at hand.
  4. D
    People can feel secure Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    ~Vague laws → Feel secure. This answer is the negation of the conclusion, so it can’t justify it.
  5. E
    Only people who feel Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Know if action is legal → Feel secure. Another answer that’s the negation of the correct answer!

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion