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
A classic suit may stay in style for as long as five years.
A trendy hat will go out of style in a year or two.
It is worthwhile to pay more to get a well-constructed hat, while the trendy hat should be purchased as cheaply as possible.
The argument assumes that the amount of money one should spend on a piece of clothing depends on how long one expects to wear it.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the principle underlying the reasoning above?
Formal attire tends to be
The argument does not distinguish between formal and casual attire.
1% picked this
The amount of money one
Why this is right
This connects the amount of money one should pay for a piece of clothing with how long one expects to wear it.
Skill tested: Principle-Conform · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
96% picked this
One should not buy a
The argument is that one should be willing to pay less for a cheaply made garment, but does not go so far as suggesting one should not buy it.
1% picked this
The amount of money one
The comparison in the argument is between clothing one expects to wear for a while and clothing one expects to only wear for a short period of time. A comparison between men’s and women’s clothing is not relevant to the argument.
1% picked this
It is more appropriate to
The argument does not distinguish between office attire and casual attire.
1% picked this
Continue the review in LSAT Lab
Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.
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.