LSAT 131 – Section 2 – Question 26

LSAT 131 - Section 2 - Question 26

December 2009

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:21

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

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT131 S2 Q26
+LR
Sufficient assumption +SA
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
Rule-Application +RuleApp
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
15%
163
B
63%
166
C
8%
160
D
7%
159
E
7%
159
150
160
170
 +Hardest 147.936 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Commentator: For a free market to function properly, each prospective buyer of an item must be able to contact a large number of independent prospective sellers and compare the prices charged for the item to what the item is worth. Thus, despite advertised prices and written estimates available from many of its individual businesses, the auto repair industry does not constitute a properly functioning free market.

Summary
The author concludes that the auto repair industry does not constitute a properly functioning free market. This is based on the following statement, which describes a requirement for being a properly functioning free market:
In order for a free market to function properly, each potential buyer of an item must be able to contact a large number of independent sellers, and compare the prices those sellers charge for the item to what the item is worth.

Missing Connection
The premise establishes a requirement for being a properly functioning free market. So if the author concludes that a certain market is not a properly functioning free market, we know the author is trying to trigger the contrapositive of the premise. In other words, the author’s assuming that market doesn’t meet the requirement. That’s how we can tell we’re looking for an answer that establishes the auto repair industry is not one in which each potential buyer can contact a larger number of independent sellers and compare the prices charged to what the item is worth.

A
People do not usually shop for auto repairs but instead take their autos to their regular repair shop out of habit.
Although (A) establishes that people usually don’t actually compare prices, this doesn’t establish that people don’t have the ABILITY to compare prices charged to what the repairs are worth. They might be ABLE to, even if they tend not to.
B
Some persons who are shopping for auto repairs cannot determine what these repairs are worth.
(B) establishes that the auto repair industry does not meet what’s required to be a properly functioning free market. If some people can’t determine what the repairs are worth, then they can’t compare prices to what the repairs are worth. So it’s not true that “each” potential buyer can compare prices to what the repairs are worth.
C
Not all auto repair shops give customers written estimates.
(C) establishes that some auto repair shops don’t give written estimates. This doesn’t establish that buyers can’t compare the prices charged to what the repairs are worth. Maybe people get verbal price estimates in person or over the phone. Or maybe they can still get price estimates from a large number of sellers, even if it’s not all sellers.
D
Many auto repair shops charge more for auto repairs than these repairs are worth.
We care about whether people can compare prices charged to what the repairs are worth. Whether the prices are higher or lower than the repairs’ worth is a separate, irrelevant issue.
E
Because it is not regulated, the auto repair industry does not have standardized prices.
(E) doesn’t establish that people can’t compare prices charged to what the repairs are worth. Even if repairs don’t have a standardized price, the repairs can still have a worth to the potential buyer. The potential buyer can still compare prices charged to that worth.

An additional note to (B).

So what we see here is quite common with correct SA answer choices. Given that the bar for correct answer in SA is sufficient, the LSAT writers have room to maneuver. They can give us something that's sufficient for the SA. In other words, they can give us a subset of what we anticipate. Allow me to illustrate.

Let's say that "all mammals are lovely therefore, Skittles is lovely." That's a crap argument but nevermind that. What's the missing SA? Simple... right... ?

Right?

Skittles is a mammal. That's what we need.

We scan the answers and don't see any answer that says Skittles is a mammal. Okay.

But (B) says Skittles is a cat. Well, don't we know that cats --> mammals? (You should.)

So choose (B) because it's a subset of what we need. In other words, (B) is sufficient for our anticipated SA answer choice. In other words, cats sufficient mammal. Cats are subsets of mammals. Subsets are sufficient for supersets.

See, one fairly common way to hide a SA answer choice is to give us an answer choice that's sufficient for the SA answer choice.

We anticipated looking for "buyers CANNOT compare prices charged for the item to see what the item is worth." (B) gave us "cannot determine worth". (B) implies what we anticipated. If it's true that we cannot determine worth, then of course it's true that we cannot compare prices to determine worth. That's like say that you cannot get to Canada implies that you cannot drive to Canada.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 131 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply