Logical Reasoning

PT134 · S3 · Q16 Editorial: Cell-phone usage

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

Editorial: Cell-phone usage on buses and trains is annoying to other passengers.

Conclusion

That idea going around about allowing cell phones on airplanes is a bad idea.

Evidence

Cell-phone usage is annoying to other passengers in buses and trains, and in airplanes it would be even worse, because you're packed in more tightly and unable to move to any other seat.

Evaluation

They're asking us about the third sentence. It's part of the support. This suggests that telegraphed that the second sentence was the conclusion.

Goal

If we want to, we can just go to the answers, .

If you want to ask yourself now whether it's a supported premise (i.e. an intermediate / subsidiary conclusion) or if it's a regular ol' unsupported premise, you can.

Just pose the claim being asked about:

Then ask, "Why should we believe that?" and see if there are any claims that sound like an answer. Here the last two claims do sound like reasons why we should believe that cell phones on planes is even worse: you're packed in more tightly and you can't change your seat.

Since the claim we're looking at does have supporting ideas, it would be fair to call it an Intermediate Conclusion.

16.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the editorial's argument by the statement that cell-phone use would be far more upsetting on airplanes than it is on buses and trains?

  1. It is the main conclusion

    Not Conclusion

    The conclusion is the 2nd sentence.

    10% picked this

  2. It is a claim that

    Out of Scope: claim rebutted

    The claim that the author is rebutting isn't explicitly made in this paragraph; he's rebutting the idea of allowing cell phones on planes. That idea only appears in the 2nd sentence; we're being asked about the 3rd sentence.

    0% picked this

  3. It is a premise that

    Not Indirect

    The 3rd sentence is the Intermediate Conclusion, so it's the most direct support for the argument. Premises -> Intermediate Conclusion -> Main Conclusion This answer choice applies to each of the last two sentences.

    17% picked this

  4. Correct

    It is a conclusion for

    Why this is right

    This is the definition of an Intermediate Conclusion. Plan to allow phones on planes is ill advised. why? B/c phones are even more annoying on planes why? B/c on planes you're jammed next to people, and you can't change seats.

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

    73% picked this

  5. It provides background information that

    Does Play a Role

    This is the Intermediate Conclusion we're talkin' about here. The ultimate Glue guy in any argument. She's supported by the last two sentences, and she lends support to the 2nd sentence.

    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.

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