Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT113 S3 Q19 Explanation

If the flowers Drew received today

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

TopicsWeaken

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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

If the flowers Drew received today had been sent by someone who knows Drew well, that person would have known that Drew prefers violets to roses. Yet Drew received roses. On the other hand, if the flowers had been sent by someone who does not know Drew well, then that person would to receive violets, or a card, or these flowers were intended for someone else.

What this question is testing

Weaken

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion less likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that look negative but attack a claim the argument never relied on.

Winning move

Find the assumption the argument depends on, then pick the choice that undermines it.

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

The question
19.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most weakens

Answer choices

  1. Irrelevant Relationship11% picked this

    Most people send roses when they

    What's true of others may not be true of the person who sent Drew roses.

  2. Correct52% picked this

    Some people send flowers for a reason other than the desire

    Why this is right

    This allows us to argue that someone intentionally sent Drew roses, without a card. They know Drew well, so they didn't bother to send a signed card. They know Drew well enough to know that he prefers violets, but they sent roses anyway. Maybe they were just trying to annoy him or teach him a lesson for bringing the wrong kind of wine to their recent dinner party.

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

  3. Premise Support10% picked this

    Someone who does not know Drew well would be unlikely to

    The fact that a stranger would be unlikely to send Drew flowers doesn't move the needle at all. Because there was no card, we already know for sure that the flowers didn't come from a stranger.

  4. Too Weak15% picked this

    The florist has never delivered the wrong flowers to

    For this to undermine the argument we would need to assume that something true of the florist in the past is also true of the florist today. But we don't know that.

  5. Irrelevant Relationship12% picked this

    Some people who know Drew well have sent Drew cards along

    We were given a conditional that said "anyone who doesn't know Drew well would have definitely sent a card", but that doesn't preclude the possibility that people who know Drew well also send cards.

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