LSAT 10 – Section 1 – Question 04

Target time: 0:55

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Type Tags Answer
Curve Question
PT10 S1 Q04
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
+Easiest 146.679 +SubsectionMedium

We can identify this question as Method of Reasoning because of the question stem: “In the conversation, Yolanda does which one of the following?”

When dealing with a Method of Reasoning question, we know we are looking for an answer choice that correctly describes the structure of our entire argument. Our correct answer is going to fit the argument exactly. Our wrong answer choices likely explain argument structures we are familiar with, but that simply don’t apply to the specific question we are looking at. Knowing what the right and wrong answers are going to do, we can jump into the stimulus.

Immediately we should make note of the two speakers at play. This means we could possibly be dealing with two different conclusions with different levels of support. Our first speaker, Sally, introduces some conditional reasoning. Sally tells us: S (if they study at a university) → /A (there is no alcohol problem). We are told on the basis of this relationship that unless something is done about the alcohol problem at this university, Sally will have to transfer somewhere with no fraternities.

Woah, where did that come from? Sally goes from talking about an alcohol problem to accusing the fraternities of causing these issues. By telling us Sally may end up transferring to a university without fraternities Sally assumes that: /F (no fraternities) → /A (no alcohol problem). Our second speaker points out this assumption exactly. Yolanda points out that fraternities are not a necessary condition for universities having alcohol problems. Our second speaker concludes alcohol is a culture rather than a fraternity problem because of the universities with alcohol problems that do not have fraternities.

Knowing that Yolanda points out the existence of these issues in the absence of fraternities, we can proceed into answer choice elimination.

Answer Choice (A) This answer suggests Yolanda introduces a hypothetical about the number of people who will abuse alcohol. Rather than discuss what would happen in a certain case Yolanda discusses specific instances of alcohol problems in the absence of fraternities.

Answer Choice (B) This answer accuses Yolanda of saying “because one university has this issue, all universities must have this issue.” Instead the stimulus presents us with the opposite. Because alcohol problems exist at all universities Yolanda concludes fraternities are not an issue at this particular university.

Answer Choice (C) This answer is not descriptively accurate. In their argument Yolanda tells us that fraternities are not a required condition for alcohol problems. Yolanda does not establish that it’s impossible for fraternities to ever cause alcohol problems.

Correct Answer Choice (D) This is exactly what we are looking for! This is the only answer choice that points out Yolanda’s evidence; alcohol problems at other universities that do not have fraternities.

Answer Choice (E) Similar to answer choice A, we have here a hypothetical scenario not present in Yolanda’s reply. We do not see Yolanda conclude they would maintain their conclusion even if their evidence was not accurate.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply