Logical Reasoning

PT101 · S3 · Q19 Every student who walks to school

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Every student who walks to school goes home for lunch.

Conclusion

Some students w/ part-time jobs do not walk to school.

Evidence

Every student who walks to school goes home for lunch.

Evaluate

We're trying to prove .

Let's ask ourselves about the subject and predicate of this claim: Does the evidence talk about students w/ part-time jobs?

No. So "students w/ part-time jobs" must be in the correct answer.

Does the evidence give us a way to prove do not walk to school?

Maybe. Let's contrapose the conditional we're given, since it talks about walking to school. GIVEN: walk to school → go home for lunch CONTRA: ~go home for lunch → ~walk to school

Goal

If we can establish that someone 'doesn't go home for lunch', then we can prove that they 'do not walk to school'.

So if we're trying to prove that Some students w/ part time jobs do not walk to school

we want to know that Some students w/ part time jobs do not go home for lunch

19.

The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

  1. Some students who do not

    Illegal Opposite

    We could throw this out immediately, if we see it's not talking about "students with part-time jobs" (it's talking about those without). Because we wanted students with part time jobs do not go home for lunch they're giving us this fake opposie students without part time jobs do go home for lunch

    11% picked this

  2. Every student who goes home

    Unrelated to Goal

    If it's not talking about "students w/ part time jobs", it's useless to us, since we're trying to prove a claim about those people and we don't have a single fact about them.

    1% picked this

  3. Some students who do not

    Unrelated to Goal

    This is very similar to (A). It doesn't write the entire answer as an opposite, just the first half. But that's the half that tells us to stop reading. If we're not talking about "students who do have part time jobs", then the answer is hopeless. We're trying to prove a conclusion about the part time jobs students, but currently have no information about them.

    12% picked this

  4. Correct

    Some students who do not

    Why this is right

    The order of Some statements doesn't matter, since Some just means "at least one". Some cats are grey = some grey things are cats We had a conditional rule that said don't go home for lunch → don't walk to school This answer provides a fact that there are some students who don't go home for lunch (and thus don't walk to school) and who have part-time jobs. So we've proven that there are some students with part-time jobs who don't walk to school.

    Skill tested: Sufficient Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    70% picked this

  5. Every student who goes home

    Unrelated to Goal

    If it's not talking about "students w/ part time jobs", it's useless to us, since we're trying to prove a claim about those people and we don't have a single fact about them.

    5% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free