Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT103 S2 Q9 Explanation

Early pencil leads were made of

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

TopicsMost Supported

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Early pencil leads were made of solid graphite mined in Cumberland, in Britain. Modern methods of manufacturing pencil leads from powdered graphite are the result of research sponsored by the government of France in the 1790s, when thus had no access to Cumberland graphite.

What this question is testing

Most Supported

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
9.

The information above most strongly supports which one of

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong: only suitable deposit4% picked this

    The world’s only deposit of graphite suitable for manufacture of pencils is in

    Not only is this way stronger than any claim we could derive from the passage, but it seems somewhat contradicted by the fact that French people were able to develop graphite pencils even when they didn't have access to Cumberland graphite.

  2. Correct78% picked this

    In the 1790s, France’s government did not know of any accessible source of solid graphite appropriate to meet

    Why this is right

    This seems well supported by the causal story we're told: During war with Britain, France could no longer get Cumberland graphite (the means by which early pencil leads were made). As a result, they had to innovate. The government sponsored research that ended up in the invention of powdered graphite. If France had had an alternative means of getting solid graphite (if they could have just asked Spain for some solid graphite), then they wouldn't have been forced to invent the powdered graphite that they did. Is this speculative? Yes. Could the government have had an accessible alternative to Cumberland graphite and still decided to sponsor this research? Yes. But that's a pretty unlikely scenario. On Most Supported we're allowed to use a little speculative common sense, especially if the other answers seem harder to defend. If the French government felt the need to sponsor research into making pencils a different way, then it suggests that they were at a dead end when it came to making pencils from solid graphite.

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

  3. Speculates Causal Backstory5% picked this

    One of the causes of war between France and Britain in the 1790s was the British government’s attempt to limit the amount of

    This tries to speculate about the reason for the war between France and Britain. Is it possible that the war between the countries was a beef over how much graphite France was importing? Sure, but that's very unlikely. It would be weird if France went to war with Britain just because the Brits wouldn't ship out as much graphite as France wanted. No matter what the cause of the war between Britain and France, it makes sense that French people would be cut off from friendly import/export deals with Britain and vice versa. The fact that France can't import British graphite during a war with Britain doesn't suggest that the war is being fought over graphite. It just suggests that the two countries are at war, so normal trading has been interrupted.

  4. Too Strong: frequently / great benefit13% picked this

    Government-sponsored research frequently gives rise to inventions that are of great

    This seems to be an example when government-sponsored research gave rise to invention that seems to be beneficial enough that it's still the modern standard. But it's hard for us to say it had great benefit to society or that this type of thing happens frequently.

  5. Too Strong: all Contradicted1% picked this

    Even today, all pencil leads contain

    This is way too extreme and seems somewhat contradicted by the fact that modern pencils use the French powdered graphite method, and the French were not using Cumberland graphite for those pencils.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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