Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT117 S4 Q26 Explanation

Political theorist: For all of

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

Political theorist: For all of its members to be strong in foreign policy, an alliance of countries must respond aggressively to problems. An alliance will do so only if every member of the alliance perceives the problems as grave. But the European Union countries will not all perceive a problem as grave member countries of the European Union will be strong in foreign policy.

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
26.

The conclusion drawn above follows logically if which one of the following

Answer choices

  1. Unrelated to Goal1% picked this

    Countries that refuse to join alliances generally respond more aggressively to problems than do countries

    This didn't fire any of the three contrapositive triggers we're looking for, in order to prove "not all strong foreign policy". ~Agree ? ~Per Grave ? ~Resp Agg ? ~Str FP - they won't all agree it threatens economy - they won't all perceive as grave - they won't respond aggressively We should also be creeped out by the Relative vs. Absolute shift. The argument deals with whether or not they respond aggressively. This answer is shifting to more/less aggressively.

  2. Unrelated to Goal4% picked this

    Countries become less aggressive in foreign policy if greater wealth leads them to think that they have more to lose

    This didn't fire any of the three contrapositive triggers we're looking for, in order to prove "not all strong foreign policy". ~Agree ? ~Per Grave ? ~Resp Agg ? ~Str FP - they won't all agree it threatens economy - they won't all perceive as grave - they won't respond aggressively We should also be creeped out by out of scope stuff (greater wealth). Correct answers to Sufficient Assumption almost never bring in any new wording.

  3. Correct76% picked this

    Problems that appear to some member countries of the European Union to threaten the alliance’s economy will not

    Why this is right

    This fires the first of our triggers, setting the whole contrapositive chain in motion. ~Agree ? ~Per Grave ? ~Resp Agg ? ~Str FP If problems that appear to some members to threaten the economy will not appear that way to others, then we know they will not all agree that a problem threatens their alliance's economy. Thus, they won't all perceive it as grave and thus they won't respond aggressively, which proves that not all members will be strong in foreign policy.

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

  4. Unrelated to Goal15% picked this

    European Union member countries that fail to perceive the economic relevance of problems are generally

    This didn't fire any of the three contrapositive triggers we're looking for, in order to prove "not all strong foreign policy". ~Agree ? ~Per Grave ? ~Resp Agg ? ~Str FP - they won't all agree it threatens economy - they won't all perceive as grave - they won't respond aggressively We should also be creeped out by out of scope stuff (perceive economic relevance). Correct answers to Sufficient Assumption almost never bring in any new wording.

  5. Unrelated to Goal3% picked this

    Alliances that are economically beneficial for a given country are not necessarily beneficial with regard

    This didn't fire any of the three contrapositive triggers we're looking for, in order to prove "not all strong foreign policy". ~Agree ? ~Per Grave ? ~Resp Agg ? ~Str FP - they won't all agree it threatens economy - they won't all perceive as grave - they won't respond aggressively We should also be creeped out by out of scope stuff (economically beneficial alliances).

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