Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT111 S4 Q14 Explanation

Marian Anderson, the famous contralto,

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

TopicsSufficient Assumption

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

Marian Anderson, the famous contralto, did not take success for granted. We know this because Anderson had to struggle early in life, and anyone who has to struggle early in a good perspective on the world.

What this question is testing

Sufficient Assumption

Your task

Find the assumption that, if added, guarantees the conclusion follows.

Common trap

Answers that only partly bridge the gap, leaving the conclusion unproven.

Winning move

Identify the new term in the conclusion and pick the choice that links it to the evidence.

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

The question
14.

The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the

Answer choices

  1. Unrelated to Goal0% picked this

    Anyone who succeeds takes success for

    We need a rule that allows us to prove that someone "does not take success for granted". This answer looks like this: Succeeds ? Takes success for granted We can only prove what's on the Right side of any conditional statement.

  2. Correct76% picked this

    Anyone who is able to keep a good perspective on the world does not take

    Why this is right

    This matches the missing link we predicted: keep --> didn't take good P succ 4 granted Here's what we knew: Marian had to struggle early. If you struggle early, you keep a good perspective. Here's what our brains need to think, when we synthesized those two claims: Okay, so Marian keeps a good perspective. According to this answer choice, If you keep a good perspective, you don't take success for granted. So now what can we say about Marian? Marian doesn't take success for granted. Oh, snap, we just proved the conclusion.

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

  3. Unrelated to Goal4% picked this

    Anyone who is able to keep a good perspective on the world has to struggle

    This answer doesn't provide a rule that lets us conclude that someone "does not take success for granted". The evidence didn't give us such a rule, so if an answer choice doesn't provide one that we'll have no way to logically prove a conclusion claiming that someone did not take success for granted. Mathematically, if you ask me to prove that a = x, my proof has to involve claims about both 'a' and 'x'. An answer choice without "does not take success for granted" is thinking we can prove "a = x" without ever mentioning "x".

  4. Unrelated to Goal Reversed Logic5% picked this

    Anyone who does not take success for granted has to struggle

    We need a rule that allows us to prove that someone "does not take success for granted". This answer choice looks like this: does not take success ? struggled early for granted We can only prove what's on the Right side of any conditional statement, so this is functionally useless to us. We know that Marian struggled early, but knowing the Outcome (the right side) of a rule is true tells you nothing. Had this answer been written Anyone who struggled early does not take success for granted ... it would have been correct, since know that Marian struggled early, and thus could now prove that she did not take success for granted.

  5. Unrelated to Goal Reversed Logic15% picked this

    Anyone who does not take success for granted is able to keep a good perspective

    We need a rule that allows us to prove that someone "does not take success for granted". This answer choice looks like this: does not take success ? keeps good for granted perspective We can only prove what's on the Right side of any conditional statement, so this is functionally useless to us. We know that Marian keeps a good perspective, but knowing the Outcome (the right side) of a rule is true tells you nothing. Had this answer been written Anyone who keeps a good perspective does not take success for granted ... it would have been correct, since know that Marian keeps a good perspective, and thus could now prove that she did not take success for granted.

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