Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT125 S4 Q6 Explanation

Wood-frame houses withstand

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

TopicsParadox

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

Wood-frame houses withstand earthquakes far better than masonry houses do, because wooden frames have some flexibility; their walls can better handle lateral forces. In a recent earthquake, however, a wood-frame masonry house next door was undamaged.

What this question is testing

Paradox

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question
6.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the results of the

Answer choices

  1. Out of Scope2% picked this

    In earthquake-prone areas, there are many more wood-frame houses than

    The issue is not how many of each there are, but rather how strong each one is.

  2. Out of Scope1% picked this

    In earthquake-prone areas, there are many more masonry houses than

    The issue is not how many of each there are, but rather how strong each one is.

  3. Correct89% picked this

    The walls of the wood-frame house had once been damaged in

    Why this is right

    This makes the wood-frame house weaker than a usual wood-frame house.

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

  4. Too Weak0% picked this

    The masonry house was far more expensive than the

    More expensive is not the same as stronger.

  5. Half Scope7% picked this

    No structure is completely impervious to the destructive lateral forces exerted

    This might help explain why the wood-frame house was destroyed, but it does not help explain why it was destroyed while a masonry house next door was undamaged.

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