Logical Reasoning

PT103 · S2 · Q9 Early pencil leads were made of

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

Early pencil leads were made of solid graphite mined in Cumberland, in Britain.

Information

Comparison early pencil lead: solid graphite (mined in Cumberland) modern pencil lead: powdered graphite

Causality (result of / thus) Research sponsored modern methods by govt of France in 1790 >> of powdered graph

France at war no access to with Britain >> Cumberland graphite

Evaluate

The second sentence contains two causal ideas that could potentially chain together.

1. France and Britain go to war 2. Thus, the French can't make solid graphite pencils using Cumberland's graphite. 3. Thus, the French government sponsors research into an alternative and comes up with powdered graphite. 4. Those methods are used today.

So we could potentially say that modern methods of manufacturing pencil leads trace back to the 1790s, when France and Britain were at war.

Goal

Look for whatever answer we can best support.

9.

The information above most strongly supports which one of the following?

  1. The world’s only deposit of

    Too Strong: only suitable deposit

    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.

    4% picked this

  2. Correct

    In the 1790s, France’s government

    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.

    77% picked this

  3. One of the causes of

    Speculates Causal Backstory

    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.

    5% picked this

  4. Government-sponsored research frequently gives rise

    Too Strong: frequently / great benefit

    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.

    14% picked this

  5. Even today, all pencil leads

    Too Strong: all Contradicted

    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.

    1% 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