Stimulus: The shoe factory in Centerville is the towns largest firm and it employs more unskilled workers on a full time basis than all of the other businesses in town combined. Thus, if the shoe factory closes, more than 50% of Centerville residents that are unskilled and are employed full time will lose their jobs.
Explanation: There is one key assumption that destroys this argument... what if people working in Centerville don't actually live there? What if they work remote? We can not draw a conclusion of the residents of Centerville as a whole without knowing that EVERY person in the sample actually is a resident in Centerville!
A : Completely irrelevant. More people tells us nothing about how many people are employed at the shoe factory that are actual residents.
B : Again irrelevant, the stimulus already told us that the shoe factory "employs more unskilled workers on a full time basis than all other businesses in town combined." So, we established there is a lot of unskilled workers.. but we don't know whether they are residents.
C : This is closer, but does not resolve the issue stated above. What if all of the unskilled workers work remote in different towns? What if they travel in to town every day?
D : Correct. This eliminates the possibility that there are people who work that don't live there, and makes this argument valid.
E : Okay....? So what? We need to talk about the workers/residents.
1
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
1 comments
Stimulus: The shoe factory in Centerville is the towns largest firm and it employs more unskilled workers on a full time basis than all of the other businesses in town combined. Thus, if the shoe factory closes, more than 50% of Centerville residents that are unskilled and are employed full time will lose their jobs.
Explanation: There is one key assumption that destroys this argument... what if people working in Centerville don't actually live there? What if they work remote? We can not draw a conclusion of the residents of Centerville as a whole without knowing that EVERY person in the sample actually is a resident in Centerville!
A : Completely irrelevant. More people tells us nothing about how many people are employed at the shoe factory that are actual residents.
B : Again irrelevant, the stimulus already told us that the shoe factory "employs more unskilled workers on a full time basis than all other businesses in town combined." So, we established there is a lot of unskilled workers.. but we don't know whether they are residents.
C : This is closer, but does not resolve the issue stated above. What if all of the unskilled workers work remote in different towns? What if they travel in to town every day?
D : Correct. This eliminates the possibility that there are people who work that don't live there, and makes this argument valid.
E : Okay....? So what? We need to talk about the workers/residents.