Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.6K All Categories
- 27.4K LSAT
- 16.7K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 73 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 109 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 3 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 42 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 19 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.9K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 598 Technical Problems
- 277 Off-topic
PT1.S3.Q19 - Train service suffers when a railroad combines...
YanWangg
Core Member
When I do Necessary Assumption Question, I prefer to negate the Answer Choice and then test whether the argument becomes invalid. But this question confused me. Can anybody help me explain the question by negating and testing?
Comments
To summarize the argument:
Premise: Train service suffers when a railroad combines commuter and freight services.
Conclusion: Therefore, if the railroad is to be successful then it must concentrate on one over the other,
C: Unless a railroad serves its customers well, it will not be successful.
Negation: The railroad will not be successful even if the railroad serves its customers well.
The author sees the poor train service as an inhibitor of the railroad's success. But if regardless of improved services the railroad would still not be successful then concentrating on one service over the other would be pointless.