All practice questions

3960 questions

Question 1541Question →

Match each flawed argument stimulus to the abstract description of the logical error it commits.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

A recent industry survey revealed that tech companies that adopted open-plan offices over the last decade saw a 30 percent increase in overall employee productivity. Based on this data, it is clear that removing physical barriers like walls and cubicles directly causes employees to work more efficiently and collaborate better.
The city's updated zoning regulations clearly stipulate that any commercial building designed by a registered architect will be approved for construction in the downtown sector. The new community recreation center was approved for construction there last month, so we can be certain that it must have been designed by a registered architect.
During her campaign, the mayoral candidate emphatically promised to bring unprecedented transparency to the local city council and its operations. Since she has installed floor-to-ceiling transparent glass for all the walls in her new executive office, she has clearly fulfilled her primary campaign promise to the voters.
An industry report noted that our company's overall market share in the competitive organic beverage sector increased from 10 percent to 20 percent during the third quarter. Therefore, we must have sold exactly twice as many beverage units this quarter as we did in the previous quarter.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The open-plan office argument matches the correlation/causation flaw; the zoning regulation argument matches the sufficient/necessary flaw; the campaign promise argument matches the equivocation flaw; and the beverage market share argument matches the proportion/quantity flaw.
Each flawed argument exhibits a classic LSAT logical vulnerability. The open-plan office argument commits a causal flaw. The zoning law argument commits a conditional logic flaw. The political promise argument equivocates on a word's meaning. The beverage company argument confuses percentages with absolute numbers.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first argument regarding open-plan offices.
Identifies that a simultaneous occurrence (open plans and increased productivity) is used to claim a direct cause.
This aligns with the classic flaw of confusing correlation with causation.
2
Analyze the second argument regarding building approval.
Identifies conditional logic where 'designed by architect (sufficient) -> approved' is reversed to 'approved -> designed by architect (necessary)'.
This represents treating a sufficient condition as a necessary one, an illegal reversal.
3
Analyze the third argument regarding political transparency.
Identifies that 'transparency' means political openness in the premise, but physical see-through material in the conclusion.
This matches the definition of equivocation, or shifting the meaning of a key term.
4
Analyze the fourth argument regarding market share.
Identifies that market share (a percentage) does not guarantee absolute sales volume (a number), since the total market size could have shrunk.
This demonstrates the flaw of confusing proportions with absolute quantities.

Key Concept

Identifying abstract patterns of flawed reasoning across different contexts
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 1542Question →

Read the following argument, then evaluate the statement below it.

Political Commentator: In any robust democracy, the ruling party will inevitably face plummeting approval ratings during an economic recession. The ruling Coalition Party is currently facing plummeting approval ratings amidst a severe economic recession. Therefore, despite recent claims to the contrary by international observers, it is clear that our country remains a robust democracy.

Statement: The commentator's reasoning is flawed because it infers that a certain political condition is absent merely on the grounds that a condition sufficient to guarantee its presence is absent.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: False

Answer

The statement is False.
The statement is false because it describes the wrong logical fallacy. The statement describes an 'illegal negation' (inferring something is absent because a sufficient condition is absent). However, the argument explicitly concludes that a condition (robust democracy) is present. The argument actually commits an 'illegal reversal' by treating a necessary result (plummeting ratings) as sufficient evidence to prove the initial condition.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the conditional structure of the commentator's premise.
Premise: Robust Democracy (during an economic recession) -> Plummeting Ratings. Being a robust democracy is sufficient to guarantee plummeting ratings; plummeting ratings are a necessary consequence.
Identifying formal logic relationships is required to accurately evaluate the nature of the flaw.
2
Analyze the conclusion drawn by the commentator.
The author observes the necessary condition (Plummeting Ratings) and concludes that the sufficient condition (Robust Democracy) is present.
Comparing the conclusion to the premises reveals the exact logical leap being made.
3
Identify the logical error actually committed in the argument.
The argument affirms the consequent, committing an illegal reversal. It erroneously treats a necessary condition as a sufficient one to prove a condition is present.
Knowing the actual flaw allows us to judge the accuracy of the provided statement.
4
Evaluate the provided statement against the actual flaw.
The statement describes an argument that concludes a condition is absent (denying the antecedent / illegal negation). Since the stimulus argument concludes a condition is present, the statement's description is fundamentally inaccurate.
This determines whether the statement is true or false.

Key Concept

Distinguishing between descriptions of Illegal Reversals (Affirming the Consequent) and Illegal Negations (Denying the Antecedent) in conditional reasoning.
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Question 1543Question →

Sociologist: A functioning democracy requires its electorate to have access to impartial political reporting. Over the last decade, however, the media landscape has been entirely consolidated by three massive entertainment conglomerates. Because these conglomerates are legally bound to prioritize maximizing their quarterly profits above all other objectives, the fundamental prerequisites for a functioning democracy are presently being undermined.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the sociologist's argument depends?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Prioritizing the maximization of quarterly profits above all other objectives is incompatible with providing impartial political reporting.

Answer

The assumption that prioritizing the maximization of quarterly profits above all other objectives is incompatible with providing impartial political reporting.
This statement perfectly bridges the gap in the author's reasoning. The author concludes that the prerequisite for democracy (impartial reporting) is undermined because media conglomerates prioritize quarterly profits above all else. For this conclusion to be valid, there must be a fundamental conflict between prioritizing profits and providing impartial reporting. If we apply the Negation Test and assume that maximizing profits is NOT incompatible with providing impartial political reporting, the entire argument collapses.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the fundamental prerequisites for a functioning democracy are presently being undermined.
Locating the main conclusion is essential for determining what the premises are attempting to prove.
2
Identify the premises and the fundamental prerequisite mentioned.
The prerequisite is 'access to impartial political reporting.' The active premises are that media is controlled by conglomerates, and these conglomerates prioritize maximizing quarterly profits above all other objectives.
Isolating the premises reveals the evidence the author uses to reach the conclusion.
3
Find the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The argument jumps from 'prioritizing quarterly profits' to 'the prerequisite (impartial reporting) is undermined.' There is no stated connection between profit prioritization and a lack of impartial reporting.
A supporter assumption must explicitly connect the rogue elements in the premises to the rogue elements in the conclusion.
4
Formulate the necessary bridging assumption.
The argument requires the assumption that prioritizing profits prevents or is incompatible with providing impartial political reporting.
Applying the Negation Test confirms this: if maximizing profits were perfectly compatible with impartial reporting, the conclusion would no longer follow.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Question 1544Question →

Match each logical argument on the left with the necessary supporter assumption on the right that correctly bridges the gap between its premise and its conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

According to classical utilitarianism, only policies that maximize aggregate happiness are considered morally justified. Therefore, the recently proposed healthcare legislation is not morally justified.
Avian species that build their nests exclusively on the ground are highly susceptible to predation by invasive mammals. Thus, the indigenous ground-weaver bird is highly susceptible to such predation.
A startup company cannot secure Series B funding unless it has demonstrated consistent month-over-month user growth for a year. It follows that NovaTech will not secure Series B funding this quarter.
Only artifacts forged before the Bronze Age collapse can accurately be classified as true Minoan relics. Consequently, the newly discovered copper shield cannot be classified as a true Minoan relic.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The utilitarian argument pairs with the legislation failing to maximize happiness. The avian argument pairs with the ground-weaver bird nesting on the ground. The startup argument pairs with NovaTech lacking consistent growth. The artifact argument pairs with the shield not being forged before the collapse.
Each correct match successfully bridges the logical gap between the argument's premises and its conclusion. By formally linking the 'rogue' subject introduced in the conclusion to the conditional rules provided in the premises, the assumptions validate the inferences (often by satisfying the sufficient condition or triggering the contrapositive).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the formal logic of each argument's premise to identify sufficient and necessary conditions.
Identified conditional rules such as 'Morally Justified → Maximizes Happiness' and 'Nests on Ground → Susceptible to Predation'.
Supporter assumptions often rely on completing conditional chains or triggering contrapositives.
2
Examine the conclusion of each argument to determine what new element has been introduced.
Identified specific subjects in the conclusions: 'healthcare legislation', 'ground-weaver bird', 'NovaTech', and 'copper shield'.
The new subject in the conclusion must be explicitly linked to the rule established in the premise.
3
Formulate the missing link (supporter assumption) that legally connects the new subject to the established conditional rule.
Generated the required bridging statements to validate the argument.
This guarantees the truth of the conclusion based on the premise.
4
Match each logically generated assumption to the corresponding statement on the right.
Successfully paired each argument with its required supporter assumption.
Finalizes the matching process.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions in Formal Logic
Question 1545Question →

Match each flawed causal argument to the correct description of the logical fallacy it commits.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Immediately after the new software update was installed, the computer network crashed. Therefore, the software update caused the crash.
People who use wheelchairs have a much higher rate of physical disability than those who do not. Clearly, using a wheelchair causes physical disabilities.
People who are seen carrying umbrellas are much more likely to be wearing rainboots. Thus, carrying an umbrella causes one to wear rainboots.
Eating excessive amounts of sugar is known to cause weight gain. Therefore, anyone who has gained weight must have eaten excessive amounts of sugar.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct pairings match each specific argument with its corresponding causal flaw: temporal sequence to post hoc, wheelchair use to reversed causality, umbrellas/rainboots to a common third factor, and sugar/weight gain to assuming a sole cause.
Each argument perfectly demonstrates one specific causal fallacy. Matching them requires identifying the structural gap between the evidence provided and the causal conclusion drawn.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first argument regarding the software update.
Identify that the only evidence provided for causation is that the update happened immediately before the crash.
This matches the flaw of assuming causation based solely on a temporal sequence.
2
Analyze the second argument regarding wheelchair use.
Recognize that physical disability leads to wheelchair use, but the argument claims the opposite.
This represents the flaw of reversing the actual direction of cause and effect.
3
Analyze the third argument regarding umbrellas and rainboots.
Identify that rainy weather causes people to use both umbrellas and rainboots.
This matches the flaw of ignoring a common third factor that causes both phenomena.
4
Analyze the fourth argument regarding sugar and weight gain.
Note that while sugar causes weight gain, other factors can also cause weight gain.
This demonstrates the flaw of treating one possible cause as the only possible cause.

Key Concept

Identifying and categorizing distinct types of causal logical flaws.
Question 1546Question →

A supermarket chain previously offered a "Buy One, Get One Free" (BOGO) promotion on its premium coffee brand exclusively on weekends, while charging the regular full price on weekdays. Recently, the chain eliminated the weekend BOGO promotion entirely and permanently reduced the regular price of the coffee by 50 percent every day of the week, accurately advertising that customers could now get the promotional per-unit price anytime. In the year following this pricing change, the total number of bags of this premium coffee sold by the chain increased by 20 percent compared to the prior year. Nevertheless, the chain's overall profit derived from this premium coffee dropped substantially, even though the wholesale cost per bag and all associated operational costs remained constant.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Prior to the pricing change, a substantial proportion of the supermarket's premium coffee sales occurred on weekdays, when customers purchased the coffee at the regular full price.

Answer

The correct answer states that prior to the pricing change, a substantial proportion of the premium coffee sales occurred on weekdays at the regular full price.
The paradox asks us to explain how total profit declined despite a 20 percent increase in total volume and constant costs, given that the new permanent price (50 percent off) yields the exact same per-bag revenue as the old BOGO promotion. This discrepancy is resolved by recognizing that under the old system, not all bags were sold at the promotional BOGO price. The correct answer reveals that a substantial proportion of sales occurred on weekdays at full price. Under the new system, these high-margin full-price sales are replaced by discounted sales. The loss of the massive profit margin on these weekday sales mathematically outweighs the profit gained from the 20 percent increase in total volume, perfectly explaining the drop in total profit.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the financial mechanics of the pricing change.
A BOGO promotion effectively means customers pay 50% of the regular price per unit (buying 2 bags for the price of 1). The new pricing model permanently reduces the price to 50% for all units, meaning the profit per bag on discounted sales is identical in both scenarios.
To understand how revenue and profit per bag compare between the old and new promotional models.
2
Identify the core discrepancy.
Total bags sold increased by 20% and operational costs remained constant, yet total profit dropped substantially. Since the per-bag margin on discounted sales is identical in both models, the drop in total profit is mathematically paradoxical.
To pinpoint exactly what needs to be explained by the correct answer.
3
Formulate a hypothesis to resolve the paradox.
For total profit to drop despite a 20% volume increase and identical promotional margins, the supermarket must have lost a significant segment of sales that were previously occurring at a higher profit margin.
To establish the logical criteria for the correct answer.
4
Evaluate the options against the hypothesis.
The correct option reveals that under the old model, many sales occurred on weekdays at full price. The new model eliminated these high-margin sales, dragging down total profit despite the volume increase.
To select the mathematically and logically sound resolution.

Key Concept

Recognizing Hidden Subgroups and Margin Discrepancies in Averages
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 1547Question →

Consider the following argument:

Public Health Official: Last year, the city launched a comprehensive campaign to encourage drivers to wear seatbelts. The campaign drastically changed behavior: surveys confirm that the proportion of drivers in the city who regularly wear seatbelts surged from 40 percent last year to 80 percent this year. However, recent traffic reports reveal that the total number of severe injuries resulting from car accidents in the city has actually increased by 15 percent compared to last year. Clearly, wearing a seatbelt does not actually reduce a driver's risk of suffering a severe injury in a car accident.

Statement: The official's argument is actively weakened by the new finding that the total number of car accidents in the city also increased by exactly 15 percent over the past year.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: False

Answer

False. The provided statement does not weaken the argument; rather, it actively strengthens it.
The correct answer is false because the proposed finding proves that the rate of severe injuries per accident remained identical to the previous year. If the severity rate remains static despite seatbelt usage doubling, this strongly corroborates the official's conclusion that seatbelts do not reduce the risk of severe injury. Since it strengthens the argument, the assertion that it weakens the argument is false.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the official's reasoning
The official concludes seatbelts are ineffective because absolute injury numbers rose despite increased seatbelt usage.
To identify the logical gap between the premise (absolute numbers) and the conclusion (individual risk or rate).
2
Evaluate the proposed new finding
The finding states that total accidents increased by the exact same percentage (15 percent) as total severe injuries.
To determine how this new contextual fact alters the relationship between the premises and the conclusion.
3
Calculate the impact on injury rates
A parallel 15 percent increase in both accidents and injuries means the proportion of accidents resulting in severe injury remained perfectly static.
To translate absolute numbers back into the risk/rate referenced in the conclusion.
4
Determine the logical effect on the argument
A static injury rate in a population where seatbelt usage doubled proves the seatbelts had no statistical impact, thereby supporting the official's claim.
To accurately conclude that the finding strengthens the argument, meaning the statement that it 'weakens' the argument is false.

Key Concept

Understanding the difference between absolute numerical totals and proportional rates, and recognizing how explaining a numerical increase can inadvertently strengthen an argument's conclusion.
Question 1548Question →

Marine biologist: In a decisive effort to protect the endangered crested sea turtle, the regional government has recently enacted a comprehensive ban on all commercial net fishing within the Emerald Gulf. This legislative action was primarily justified by extensive ecological studies demonstrating that adult crested sea turtles frequently become fatally entangled in these commercial nets during their migratory patterns. Therefore, by eliminating this specific environmental hazard, the new ban will likely cause the overall crested sea turtle population to increase significantly over the course of the next decade.

Statement: Determining whether the commercial net fishing operations in the Emerald Gulf had been significantly depleting populations of predatory fish that feed heavily on crested sea turtle hatchlings is critical to evaluating the validity of the marine biologist's argument.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True
The statement is true because the proposed question perfectly satisfies the Variance Test. Discovering that the fishing nets were acting as a protective barrier for hatchlings by suppressing predator populations would severely weaken the argument's causal prediction. Conversely, discovering they had no such effect would strengthen the prediction.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Deconstruct the marine biologist's argument to identify its core premise and conclusion.
Premise: Commercial nets kill adult turtles, so banning them removes this hazard. Conclusion: The overall turtle population will significantly increase.
Evaluating an argument requires isolating the exact causal mechanism the author relies upon to reach their conclusion.
2
Analyze the factual ambiguity presented in the evaluation statement.
The statement introduces a potential indirect effect: the fishing nets might have been keeping populations of hatchling predators artificially low.
This establishes the new variable that must be tested against the original argument.
3
Apply the Variance Test by answering the question with polar opposites ('Yes' and 'No') to see the impact on the conclusion.
A 'Yes' response introduces a new threat (more predators) that weakens the conclusion. A 'No' response confirms the ban only has positive effects, strengthening the conclusion.
If opposite answers to the question yield opposite effects on the validity of the conclusion, the question is critical for evaluation.

Key Concept

The Variance Test for Argument Evaluation
Question 1549Question →

Consumer Advocate: The manufacturer of the Apex blender knew that its motor could overheat and catch fire if used continuously for more than ten minutes. Instead of redesigning the motor, the manufacturer simply included a warning in the user manual advising against continuous use beyond ten minutes. Because it is highly predictable that many consumers will not read the manual before using a kitchen appliance, the manufacturer is fully responsible for the property damage caused by the blender fires.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the consumer advocate's reasoning?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: If a manufacturer is aware of a product hazard and chooses to rely solely on a warning that is highly predictable to go unread rather than redesigning the product, the manufacturer bears full responsibility for any resulting damage.

Answer

The principle that guarantees full responsibility when a manufacturer is aware of a hazard, relies on a predictable-to-be-ignored warning, and fails to redesign the product.
The consumer advocate concludes that the manufacturer is fully responsible for the property damage. The premises establishing this are that the manufacturer knew of the fire hazard, chose not to redesign the motor, and instead relied on a manual warning that consumers were highly predictably not going to read. To justify the conclusion, the argument requires a conditional rule that guarantees full responsibility when these exact conditions are met. The correct option provides this exact sufficient condition, seamlessly bridging the gap between the factual premises and the normative conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the manufacturer is fully responsible for the property damage caused by the blender fires.
This is the normative judgment that the consumer advocate is trying to prove.
2
Identify the factual premises provided to support the conclusion.
The manufacturer knew of the hazard, chose to warn instead of redesign, and it is highly predictable that consumers will not read the warning.
These facts form the 'if' side of the necessary bridging principle.
3
Formulate a sufficient principle to bridge the gap.
If [Premises], then [Conclusion]. (If known hazard + unread warning + no redesign -> full responsibility).
A 'Justify' question requires a principle that mathematically guarantees the conclusion when the premises are activated.
4
Evaluate the options against the formulated principle.
The correct option perfectly matches the required 'If [Premises], then [Conclusion]' structure without reversing terms or introducing outside requirements.
Distractors will typically scramble the sufficient/necessary relationship or introduce irrelevant criteria.

Key Concept

Principle - Justify (Sufficient Assumption)
Question 1550Question →

Many people believe that the most significant factor in the decline of honeybee populations is the widespread use of pesticides in modern agriculture. While it is true that certain pesticides, particularly neonicotinoids, have a detrimental effect on bee health, this view oversimplifies a complex ecological issue. In reality, the primary driver of the honeybee population decline is the loss of natural foraging habitats. As urban areas expand and industrial farming relies increasingly on single-crop fields, bees are deprived of the diverse floral resources they need to maintain strong immune systems and resilient colonies. Without adequate and varied nutrition from these natural habitats, bees become significantly more vulnerable to all other stressors, including pesticides and diseases.

Which of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The loss of diverse, natural foraging habitats is the main cause of the decline in honeybee populations.

Answer

The correct answer is the option stating that the loss of diverse, natural foraging habitats is the main cause of the decline in honeybee populations.
This option accurately captures the author's explicitly stated thesis found in the third sentence: 'the primary driver of the honeybee population decline is the loss of natural foraging habitats.' The entire passage is structured around establishing and explaining this central claim over the commonly held belief regarding pesticides.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the author's primary claim in the passage.
The author explicitly states: 'In reality, the primary driver of the honeybee population decline is the loss of natural foraging habitats.'
Locating the explicit thesis statement is the most direct way to answer a main point question.
2
Analyze how the rest of the passage supports this claim.
The first two sentences introduce and dismiss a competing theory. The final two sentences provide evidence for the author's claim by explaining how habitat loss deprives bees of nutrition.
Confirming that the identified sentence is supported by the surrounding text ensures it is the overarching main point and not just a passing detail.
3
Match the identified main point to the answer choices.
The correct choice accurately paraphrases the author's explicit thesis without broadening the scope or misrepresenting the degree of certainty.
The correct answer must precisely reflect the passage's central argument.

Key Concept

Identifying the author's explicitly stated thesis while distinguishing it from attributed viewpoints and subsidiary premises.
Question 1551Question →

Criminologist: The city council insists its new zero-tolerance policing strategy is succeeding, citing a 15 percent reduction in overall violent crime over the six months since the strategy was launched. This evidence, however, is meaningless. Over those same six months, a regional economic collapse caused the city's total population to plummet by roughly 20 percent as residents relocated. Consequently, the zero-tolerance strategy has had absolutely no effect on the incidence of violent crime.

The criminologist's argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it illicitly infers a causal relationship between the policing strategy and the reduction in crime based solely on a chronological correlation.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: False

Answer

The statement is False.
The statement is false because it misattributes the logical flaw. It describes a correlation-to-causation fallacy, which is the error made by the city council. The criminologist's actual error is concluding that the policy had no effect whatsoever merely because the council's evidence for success was flawed (an 'absence of evidence' fallacy).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Deconstruct the stimulus into the opponent's claim, the author's premise, and the author's conclusion.
Opponent (city council): The policing strategy caused the 15% crime drop. Author's premise: The population dropped by 20% simultaneously due to an economic collapse. Author's conclusion: The policing strategy had absolutely no effect.
Identifying the structural components is strictly required to determine exactly whose reasoning is being evaluated.
2
Analyze the logical vulnerability specifically in the author's (criminologist's) inference.
The criminologist jumps from 'the city council's evidence is meaningless' to 'the policy had absolutely no effect.' This is a classic absence-of-evidence fallacy.
A valid flaw description must accurately target the structural error in the author's argument, not the opponent's.
3
Evaluate the provided statement against the criminologist's actual reasoning.
The statement accuses the criminologist of inferring a causal relationship from a chronological correlation. However, the criminologist does the exact opposite by attempting to dismantle a causal claim.
Because the statement attributes the opponent's logical fallacy to the author, it is a false evaluation of the author's argument.

Key Concept

Flaw in the Reasoning: Separating the Author's Flaw from the Opponent's Flaw
Question 1552Question →

To successfully cultivate the rare ghost orchid, one must precisely control the humidity of the greenhouse and use a specialized fungal fertilizer. The botanical garden has maintained precise humidity control in its new greenhouse and applied the specialized fungal fertilizer. Thus, the garden will certainly succeed in cultivating the ghost orchid.

Which of the following arguments exhibits a flawed pattern of reasoning most similar to that exhibited by the argument above?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Sarah finished the qualifying race in two hours and fifty minutes and received a clean bill of health from her doctor. Consequently, Sarah will qualify for the marathon, because anyone who qualifies for the marathon must complete the qualifying race under three hours and pass a rigorous medical examination.

Answer

The argument concerning Sarah qualifying for the marathon replicates the identical flawed pattern of reasoning.
The correct answer replicates the illegal reversal of compound necessary conditions found in the stimulus. In the stimulus, the argument establishes that achieving a result (cultivating the orchid) requires two necessary conditions (humidity control and fertilizer), and then falsely concludes that meeting those conditions is sufficient to guarantee the result. The correct choice similarly states that qualifying for a marathon requires two conditions (time limit and medical exam), establishes that these conditions are met, and falsely concludes that this guarantees qualification. It perfectly mimics the logical structure while varying the order in which the premises and conclusion are presented to avoid superficial matching.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the logical structure of the stimulus argument.
Premise 1: Successfully cultivating the orchid (A) requires humidity control (B) and fertilizer (C). [If A, then B and C]. Premise 2: The garden has humidity control (B) and fertilizer (C). Conclusion: The garden will succeed (A).
Identifying the formal abstract structure is required before evaluating the answer choices.
2
Identify the logical flaw in the stimulus.
The argument commits an illegal reversal (affirming the consequent). It treats two necessary conditions (humidity and fertilizer) as if they were jointly sufficient to guarantee success.
We must find an answer choice that commits this exact same abstract logical error.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find a matching flawed structure, paying attention to reordered premises.
The correct argument states that qualifying for a marathon (A) requires a sub-three-hour race (B) and a medical exam (C). It notes Sarah achieved B and C, and concludes she will achieve A. This perfectly matches the [If A, then B and C; B and C, therefore A] structure.
The correct choice must replicate the compound necessary condition reversal, regardless of the order in which the sentences are presented.

Key Concept

Parallel Flaw - Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Question 1553Question →

A technology firm, Cygnus Solutions, implemented a rigorous new quality-assurance protocol designed specifically to prevent major software bugs from reaching the final release of their applications. Following the implementation of this protocol, a post-release review showed that 80 percent of all user-reported software defects were categorized as "major bugs," marking the highest proportion in the company's history. Despite this, the head of engineering claims this data proves the new protocol was highly effective in reducing the absolute number of major bugs in their released software.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the engineering head's claim?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The new testing procedures successfully caught and eliminated nearly all of the minor and moderate bugs that typically make up the vast majority of user-reported defects, leading to a massive decline in total defects.

Answer

The statement indicating that the testing procedures eliminated nearly all minor and moderate bugs, leading to a massive decline in total defects.
The correct answer provides the mathematical mechanism needed to reconcile the two facts. A percentage is a ratio of a part to a whole. If the 'whole' (total bugs) decreases drastically because minor and moderate bugs are eliminated, the 'part' (major bugs) will represent a much larger percentage of that new, smaller total. This allows the absolute number of major bugs to decrease while their proportional share of all bugs increases to 80 percent.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the two apparently conflicting facts in the stimulus.
Fact 1: The percentage of major bugs is at a historic high (80%). Fact 2: The absolute number of major bugs actually decreased.
Understanding the exact nature of the statistical paradox is required before evaluating the answer choices.
2
Analyze the mathematical relationship between the conflicting facts.
A percentage is a fraction (Part / Whole). The 'Part' is major bugs, and the 'Whole' is total bugs.
Recognizing the components of the statistic reveals how both facts can be simultaneously true.
3
Determine the required mechanism to resolve the paradox.
For the percentage (fraction's overall value) to increase while the absolute number (numerator) decreases, the total number of bugs (denominator) must have decreased at an even steeper rate.
This establishes the logical criteria for the correct answer: it must explain a massive reduction in the total number of bugs.
4
Evaluate the choices against the required mechanism.
The option describing the elimination of minor and moderate bugs provides exactly this mechanism by drastically shrinking the denominator (total defects).
Eliminating the vast majority of the 'Whole' allows the remaining 'Part' to be smaller in absolute terms while larger in proportional terms.

Key Concept

To resolve a paradox where a percentage increases but the absolute number decreases, look for a significant reduction in the overall total (the denominator).
Question 1554Question →

Meteorologist: Historical agricultural data reveals that the regional almond harvest faces critical risk only when the total seasonal volume of rainfall drops below 15 inches. Over the past five years, the percentage of days during the growing season on which any measurable precipitation occurred has decreased by nearly 40%. Consequently, the region must be moving dangerously close to the 15-inch threshold that threatens the almond harvest.

Which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the meteorologist's reasoning?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: draws a conclusion regarding the overall volume of a resource based solely on evidence concerning the proportion of days it is present

Answer

The correct option is the one stating that the argument draws a conclusion regarding the overall volume of a resource based solely on evidence concerning the proportion of days it is present.
The meteorologist concludes that the absolute volume of rainfall is dropping dangerously low. However, the only evidence provided is that the frequency (or percentage) of rainy days has decreased. This reasoning is flawed because it treats a rate of occurrence as a proxy for an absolute amount. It is entirely possible for a region to experience fewer rainy days, but for the storms on those days to be significantly heavier, thereby maintaining or even increasing the total seasonal volume of rain.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structural components of the meteorologist's argument.
Premise 1: The almond harvest faces risk only if total volume drops below 15 inches. Premise 2: The percentage of rainy days has decreased by 40%. Conclusion: The region is approaching the < 15 inches total volume threshold.
Deconstructing the argument into premises and conclusion is essential for spotting the logical disconnect.
2
Examine the relationship between the evidence provided and the conclusion drawn.
The evidence relies on a rate or frequency (the percentage of days with precipitation), whereas the conclusion asserts a claim about an absolute quantity (the total seasonal volume of rainfall).
Many logical flaws stem from a fundamental mismatch between the type of evidence given and the scope of the conclusion.
3
Identify the unstated assumption that makes the reasoning vulnerable.
The argument assumes that a decrease in the frequency of rainy days guarantees a decrease in the total volume of rain, overlooking the possibility that rainfall intensity could have increased on the remaining rainy days.
Pinpointing the specific unwarranted assumption allows us to match it with the abstract descriptions found in the answer choices.
4
Evaluate the options to find the one that accurately describes this specific logical gap.
The option identifying a conclusion about overall volume being drawn from evidence about a proportion of days perfectly encapsulates the numbers-versus-percentages flaw present in the stimulus.
The correct answer in a Flaw in the Reasoning question must accurately and abstractly describe the error committed in the text.

Key Concept

Confusing rates or proportions with absolute numbers or volumes.
Question 1555Question →

Art Historian: Extensive chemical analysis confirms that the newly discovered portrait *Lady in Blue* contains genuine ultramarine pigment. Historical records demonstrate that only paintings created prior to the eighteenth century contain genuine ultramarine pigment. Therefore, *Lady in Blue* is undoubtedly a highly valuable artwork.

Statement: The assumption 'Any painting that is highly valuable was created prior to the eighteenth century' is a sufficient assumption that, if added to the premises, logically guarantees the art historian's conclusion.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: False

Answer

False
The statement is false because the provided assumption is an illegal reversal. The argument establishes that the painting is from before the eighteenth century, and concludes it is highly valuable. To guarantee this conclusion, the rule must be 'If created before the eighteenth century, then highly valuable.' The proposed assumption is 'If highly valuable, then created before the eighteenth century,' which tells us nothing about a painting we already know is old. It fails to logically prove the conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premises and map the conditional logic.
Premise 1: Lady in Blue contains genuine ultramarine. Premise 2: Genuine ultramarine → Created prior to the eighteenth century. Inference: Lady in Blue was created prior to the eighteenth century.
Understanding the established facts is necessary before determining what logical link is missing.
2
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
Conclusion: Lady in Blue → Highly valuable.
The conclusion is the endpoint that the sufficient assumption must mathematically guarantee.
3
Determine the missing logical link (the correct sufficient assumption).
The argument needs to bridge the gap from the inference (Created prior to the eighteenth century) to the conclusion (Highly valuable). The correct assumption is: Created prior to the eighteenth century → Highly valuable.
A sufficient assumption must trigger the conclusion when combined with the existing premises.
4
Evaluate the proposed assumption in the statement.
The proposed assumption is 'Highly valuable → Created prior to the eighteenth century'. This is the reverse of the needed link and does not guarantee that the Lady in Blue is highly valuable.
We must verify if the given statement matches the required logical bridge.

Key Concept

Evaluating Sufficient Assumptions and identifying Illegal Reversals in conditional logic.
Question 1556Question →

Environmentalist: Two years ago, the city implemented a ban on the use of artificial fertilizers in all residential gardens to improve the water quality of the adjacent Lake Azure. Recently, tests showed that the concentration of toxic algae in Lake Azure, which feeds on synthetic nitrogen, has decreased by 40%. Therefore, the city's ban successfully achieved its intended goal.

Which of the following must be assumed in order for the environmentalist's conclusion to be properly drawn? (Select all that apply)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The artificial fertilizers previously used in the city's residential gardens contained synthetic nitrogen.; A reduction in the concentration of toxic algae contributes to an improvement in the water quality of Lake Azure.

Answer

The correct assumptions are that the fertilizers contained synthetic nitrogen and that a reduction in toxic algae contributes to an improvement in water quality.
The argument concludes that the ban achieved its intended goal (improving water quality) based on the evidence that toxic algae decreased. For this reasoning to hold, two unstated premises are strictly necessary. First, there must be a factual link between the banned item (artificial fertilizers) and the algae's food source (synthetic nitrogen). Second, there must be a logical link between the evidence provided (less toxic algae) and the stated goal (improved water quality). Without both of these links, the argument collapses.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Deconstruct the argument into its core components.
Premise: Ban on artificial fertilizers implemented to improve water quality. Premise: Toxic algae (which feeds on synthetic nitrogen) decreased by 40%. Conclusion: The ban achieved its intended goal.
Identifying the exact premises and the specific conclusion helps reveal logical leaps made by the author.
2
Identify language shifts between the premises and the conclusion.
Gap 1: The premise discusses 'artificial fertilizers' but then introduces 'synthetic nitrogen' as the algae's food. Gap 2: The evidence cites a decrease in 'toxic algae', but the conclusion claims an 'improvement in water quality'.
Necessary assumptions almost always exist to bridge unwarranted jumps in terminology or scope.
3
Test potential answers using the Negation Technique.
Negating the correct options destroys the argument. If fertilizers lacked synthetic nitrogen, banning them wouldn't starve the algae. If less algae doesn't mean better water, the goal wasn't achieved.
The Negation Technique definitively proves whether an assumption is strictly required by the argument.

Key Concept

Bridging Concept Gaps (Supporter Assumptions)
Question 1557Question →

(1) In the nineteenth century, many historians viewed the Industrial Revolution primarily as a period of rapid technological progress that uniformly improved living standards. (2) They pointed to innovations like the steam engine and mechanized looms as evidence of a triumphant march toward modernity. (3) However, this traditional view fails to account for the severe social dislocations experienced by the working class. (4) In reality, the early decades of the Industrial Revolution resulted in a significant decline in the quality of life for many urban laborers, characterized by grueling work hours and unsanitary living conditions. (5) Consequently, historians must recognize that the era was defined just as much by profound social hardship as it was by technological advancement.

Which sentence explicitly states the author's main point? (Provide the number of the sentence, e.g., '3')

Show answer & explanation

Answer: 5; Sentence 5; Five; (5); Sentence five; Sentence #5

Answer

Sentence 5
Sentence 5 is correct because it encapsulates the author's central thesis: that the Industrial Revolution must be understood as a period characterized by both technological advancement and severe social hardship. The word 'Consequently' explicitly signals that this is the final conclusion drawn from the preceding evidence, and the phrase 'historians must recognize' indicates the author's primary purpose.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the passage to distinguish the author's actual perspective from the views of others.
Sentences 1 and 2 describe a 'traditional view' held by 'many historians,' which the author then critiques starting in Sentence 3.
Identifying attributed views helps isolate the author's own argument.
2
Locate the author's conclusion by looking for indicator words and overarching statements.
Sentences 3 and 4 present evidence against the traditional view. Sentence 5 uses the conclusion indicator 'Consequently' and the prescriptive phrase 'historians must recognize that' to state the overall thesis encompassing both technological and social aspects.
The main point is the ultimate conclusion the author is attempting to establish based on the provided evidence.

Key Concept

Explicit Main Point Identification
Estimated Time:45s
Question 1558Question →

Transportation Planner: Any infrastructure project that expands highway capacity inevitably encourages urban sprawl. The newly approved North Corridor expansion will add two additional lanes to the existing highway. Therefore, the North Corridor expansion will undoubtedly result in increased carbon emissions for the region.

Which of the following are assumptions upon which the transportation planner's argument depends? Select all that apply.

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Adding two additional lanes to an existing highway expands highway capacity.; Encouraging urban sprawl results in increased carbon emissions for the region.

Answer

The argument requires assuming both that adding lanes constitutes expanding highway capacity, and that encouraging urban sprawl leads to increased carbon emissions.
The correct choices bridge the two distinct logical gaps in the argument. First, the argument jumps from the North Corridor 'adding two additional lanes' to the premise about 'expanding highway capacity'. Second, it jumps from the consequence of 'encouraging urban sprawl' to the conclusion of 'increased carbon emissions'. Both connections are strictly necessary for the argument's conclusion to validly follow from its premises.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the argument's premises and conclusion.
Premise 1: Expanding highway capacity leads to urban sprawl. Premise 2: The North Corridor expansion adds two lanes. Conclusion: The North Corridor expansion will increase carbon emissions.
Identifying the structural components of the argument is the first step in finding logical gaps.
2
Identify the conceptual gaps between the premises and the conclusion.
Gap 1 is between 'adding two lanes' and 'expanding highway capacity'. Gap 2 is between 'encouraging urban sprawl' and 'increased carbon emissions'.
Supporter assumptions are unstated premises that connect the rogue elements of the argument together.
3
Formulate the required supporter assumptions to bridge these gaps.
Assumption 1: Adding two lanes expands highway capacity. Assumption 2: Encouraging urban sprawl leads to increased carbon emissions.
Without these logical bridges, the conclusion cannot be validly drawn from the given premises.
4
Apply the Negation Test to verify necessity.
If adding lanes does not expand capacity, or if urban sprawl does not increase emissions, the logical chain breaks and the argument collapses.
A necessary assumption must destroy the argument's validity when negated.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Question 1559Question →

Match each observed scenario to the abstract description of the apparent discrepancy it presents.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Despite a nationwide campaign that successfully reduced average daily screen time among teenagers, the incidence of sleep deprivation in this demographic sharply increased.
A city heavily subsidized public transit to reduce road traffic, and while transit ridership doubled, the average commute time for drivers on the roads also increased.
A company introduced a strict four-day workweek to reduce employee burnout, yet the number of stress-related medical leaves taken by its employees doubled.
A restaurant reduced its portion sizes by 25% while keeping prices exactly the same, but its overall quarterly profit dropped significantly.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct pairings are: 'Screen time reduction' with 'reduction in a personal habit...'; 'Public transit subsidy' with 'shift to alternative infrastructure...'; 'Four-day workweek' with 'organizational policy...'; and 'Reduced portion sizes' with 'cost-saving measure...'.
Each correct pair accurately distills the specific situational facts of the stimulus into an abstract representation of the logical tension, demonstrating the ability to strip away the contextual 'dressing' of a paradox to identify the underlying structural discrepancy.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first scenario regarding screen time and sleep deprivation.
Identify the core tension: a presumed positive behavioral change led to a negative physiological outcome.
To match it with the abstract description of a personal habit and health outcome.
2
Analyze the second scenario regarding public transit and traffic.
Identify the core tension: increased use of an alternative system did not alleviate the strain on the original system.
To match it with the description involving alternative and original infrastructures.
3
Analyze the third scenario regarding the four-day workweek.
Identify the core tension: a structural workplace change intended to reduce stress was followed by increased stress indicators.
To match it with the description of an organizational policy and occupational hazard.
4
Analyze the fourth scenario regarding restaurant portion sizes.
Identify the core tension: increasing the margin per item sold corresponded with lower overall profit.
To match it with the description of a cost-saving measure and total financial gains.

Key Concept

Abstracting the structural logic of a paradox from its specific subject matter.
Question 1560Question →

Consider the following argument by a linguist:

Any constructed language that lacks a mechanism for expressing counterfactuals cannot be fully adopted as a primary language by a speech community. The newly developed language, Novial-X, lacks complex temporal modifiers. Therefore, Novial-X will never be fully adopted as a primary language by a speech community.

The assumption that 'any constructed language that lacks a mechanism for expressing counterfactuals also lacks complex temporal modifiers' is sufficient to logically guarantee the linguist's conclusion.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: False

Answer

False
The statement is false because the proposed premise fails to guarantee the conclusion. It provides an illegal reversal of the necessary deductive bridge. We must prove Novial-X lacks counterfactuals, but the proposed premise only tells us that lacking counterfactuals guarantees lacking temporal modifiers.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the argument's formal logic structure.
Premise 1: If no counterfactual mechanism → cannot be adopted. Premise 2: Novial-X lacks temporal modifiers. Conclusion: Novial-X cannot be adopted.
Isolating the premises and conclusion is essential for finding the deductive gap.
2
Determine the exact bridge required to guarantee the conclusion.
To conclude that Novial-X cannot be adopted, we must prove it meets the condition in Premise 1 (lacking a counterfactual mechanism). Since we only know it lacks temporal modifiers, the required bridge is: If lacks temporal modifiers → lacks counterfactual mechanism.
A sufficient assumption must logically guarantee the conclusion by perfectly connecting the provided evidence to the required condition.
3
Evaluate the proposed assumption against the required bridge.
The proposed assumption is: If lacks counterfactual mechanism → lacks temporal modifiers. This is the exact reverse of the required bridge.
Adding a reversed conditional statement commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent and fails to guarantee the conclusion.

Key Concept

Sufficient Assumption and Conditional Logic Reversals
PreviousPage 78 / 198Next
All practice questions — LSAT | Examkin