Logical Reasoning

PT119 · S4 · Q2 Advertisement: The pride the people

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

Advertisement: The pride the people at Austin Stables take in their work accounts for their success in producing more winning racehorses than any other stable.

Conclusion

You can rely on Barr Motor Company to produce more winning automobiles than its competitors.

Evidence

(1) The pride at Austin Stables accounts for their success in producing more winning racehorses than any other stable. (2) For generations, Barr Motor Company has demonstrated similar pride. (3) That tradition of pride is not limited to horse racing.

Evaluate

The ad's structure is an analogy: pride causes Austin Stables to outperform competitors in horse racing; Barr has the same tradition of pride; therefore Barr should outperform its competitors in cars. The ad reaches its conclusion by drawing a parallel between two different industries based on a shared trait.

Goal

Find an answer that describes the analogy-to-conclusion structure: an analogy is used to support a conclusion that Barr is superior to its competitors.

2.

The advertisement proceeds by

  1. demonstrating that Barr Motor Company

    Bad Description

    The ad doesn't demonstrate anything about repeat customers. There's no claim about repeat business or customer loyalty — only about pride producing winners. This describes an argumentative move the ad never makes.

    0% picked this

  2. Correct

    using an analogy to reach

    Why this is right

    This nails the structure. The ad sets up Austin Stables (pride → more winning racehorses than competitors) as a parallel case, then uses that parallel to conclude Barr Motor (same pride) will produce more winning cars than its competitors. That's analogical reasoning leading to a superiority conclusion. Exactly what (B) describes.

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

    91% picked this

  3. proving that Barr Motor Company

    Bad Description

    The ad asserts Barr has a long-standing tradition of pride; it doesn't prove it. There's no evidence offered for the pride claim — just a statement that "for generations" Barr has demonstrated similar pride. Asserting something is not the same as proving it.

    5% picked this

  4. understating the role that pride

    Bad Description

    The ad doesn't understate pride's role at Austin Stables — if anything, it strongly emphasizes pride as the cause of Austin's success. The ad uses Austin's pride-driven success as the springboard for the Barr argument, so understating its role would defeat the ad's own purpose.

    3% picked this

  5. asserting that Barr Motor Company

    Bad Description

    The ad never claims Barr's tradition is older than Austin's. It says the tradition exists at both — "for generations" at Barr, with no specific timeline at Austin. The ad treats them as comparable in their tradition of pride, not as one being older than the other.

    0% 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