@CamilleChmura I try to make the argument less explicit -- replace the words with variables like A and B or use other words to explain the stimulus' form. If you can correctly identify the form of logical reasoning, then it'll be easier to identify the correct answer because only one answer will mirror the form. In this question, the conclusion of the stimulus basically said "the person who stole the diamonds had to be anyone other than Mr. Tannisch," or in other words the stimulus' conclusion ignored the evidence in the premise. The correct answer was the only one that ignored the evidence of the premise in making its conclusion.
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!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
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.
@CamilleChmura I try to make the argument less explicit -- replace the words with variables like A and B or use other words to explain the stimulus' form. If you can correctly identify the form of logical reasoning, then it'll be easier to identify the correct answer because only one answer will mirror the form. In this question, the conclusion of the stimulus basically said "the person who stole the diamonds had to be anyone other than Mr. Tannisch," or in other words the stimulus' conclusion ignored the evidence in the premise. The correct answer was the only one that ignored the evidence of the premise in making its conclusion.