Logical Reasoning

PT132 · S4 · Q25 Cities with healthy economies

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

Cities with healthy economies typically have plenty of job openings.

Conclusion

People seeking jobs should move to high tech cities.

Evidence

Most high tech cities have healthy economies. Most healthy economies have lots of job openings.

Evaluation

We have two "most" premises (typically, generally, usually, likely, tends to). They have an overlapping term. And the conclusion makes a connection between the other two terms.

Goal

Premise 1: Most A's are B. Premise 2: Most B's are C.

Conclusion: If you want a C, get an A.

25.

The reasoning in which one of the following is most similar to the reasoning in the argument above?

  1. Older antiques are usually the

    No Overlapping Premise Ingredient

    Most older antiques are the most valuable. Most antique dealers authenticate. Since the end of the first claim isn't the start of the second claim, we don't have a match for the original. No need to keep reading.

    7% picked this

  2. Antique dealers who authenticate the

    Bad Premise Match

    Only one of the premises is a "most" claim. The other is a conditional. Most authenticators have plenty of items for sale. Most valuable item → item was authenticated We can stop reading there.

    12% picked this

  3. Correct

    Antiques that have had their

    Why this is right

    Most dealers carry authenticated items. Most authenticated items are valuable. Since there was an overlapping idea, we would want to finish this off with something like, "So if you want a C, go for A", which would be "If you're looking for a valuable antique, go to a dealer." That's exactly what our conclusion does.

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

    73% picked this

  4. Many antique collectors know that

    Bad Premise Match

    We wanted two "most" premises. This argument gives us one "many" premise and one conditional premise: Many collectors know that dealers authenticate. Authenticated → most valuable. Because of that structural mismatch, we can stop reading here.

    4% picked this

  5. Many antiques increase in value

    Bad Premise Match

    We wanted two "most" premises. This gives us one "many" and one "most". That's enough reason to dislike this one, but if we dug in deeper we would see there's also no overlapping term. Most dealers have lots of valuable items. Many antiques increase value via authentication. "lots of valuable items" ≠ "increase in value via authentication. The second claim doesn't pick up where the first one left off. Let's get out of here.

    4% 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