LSAT 146 – Section 2 – Question 04

LSAT 146 - Section 2 - Question 04

June 2016

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:03

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
PT146 S2 Q04
+LR
+Exp
Weaken +Weak
A
2%
151
B
88%
163
C
1%
151
D
1%
152
E
9%
156
135
143
152
 +Medium 148.55 +SubsectionMedium

The mayor has been accused of taking a bribe based on the fact that a consultant that does business with the city paid for improvements to the mayor’s vacation house. In his own defense, the mayor has said that he paid every bill for those improvements that was presented to him.

Summarize Argument
The mayor implies his conclusion: he didn’t take a bribe. He supports this claim by stating that he paid every bill presented to him for home improvements.

Notable Assumptions
In order for the mayor not to have taken a bribe, he must not have only paid every bill presented to him, but also not been aware of any bills that were paid without him knowing.

A
Authorities are investigating the consultant for taking bribes from officials of other cities.
We don’t care if the consultant took bribes. We only care if the mayor did.
B
The mayor was aware that many of the bills were being presented to the consultant rather than to the mayor.
The mayor paid every bill presented to him, but he knew many bills were being presented to the consultant, as well. Thus, his defence falls apart.
C
The building contractor in charge of the improvements to the mayor’s house had done business with the city in the past.
That contractor could still have offered a bribe. We don’t care if they have an employment history with the city.
D
The improvements to the mayor’s house were done with expensive materials and involved thousands of hours of labor.
We don’t care what those improvements were. We care who paid for them.
E
The amount of money that the city paid the consultant over the last year greatly exceeded the cost of the improvements to the mayor’s house.
The amount the city paid the consultant and the costs of the home improvements have nothing to do with each other. We simply care if the mayor took a bribe.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 146 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply