Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT135 S2 Q15 Explanation

Economist: A country's rapid

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

TopicsSufficient Assumption

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

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

Economist: A country's rapid emergence from an economic recession requires substantial new investment in that country's economy. Since people's confidence in the economic policies of their country is a precondition for any new investment, countries that cannot emerge quickly from an economic recession.

What this question is testing

Sufficient Assumption

Your task

Find the assumption that, if added, guarantees the conclusion follows.

Common trap

Answers that only partly bridge the gap, leaving the conclusion unproven.

Winning move

Identify the new term in the conclusion and pick the choice that links it to the evidence.

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

The question
15.

Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the economist's conclusion to

Answer choices

  1. Negated Premise3% picked this

    No new investment occurs in any country that does not emerge quickly from

    This answer simply negates the ~RE → ~NI first premise.

  2. Out of Scope – Term Shift3% picked this

    Recessions in countries that put collective goals before individuals' goals tend not to affect the country's people's support

    Having confidence in the economic policies of their country and supporting the economic policies of their country are different. Since this answer is about support for economic policies, this answer is out of scope.

  3. Out of Scope – Opposite Group18% picked this

    If the people in a country that puts individuals' goals first are willing to make new investments in their country's economy, their country will

    The argument is about countries where collective goals are put before individual goals, while this answer is about a different set of countries—those that put individual goals first.

  4. Correct75% picked this

    People in countries that put collective goals before individuals' goals lack confidence in the economic

    Why this is right

    This bridges the gap between CG → ~C putting collective goals before individual goals and people not having confidence in the economic policies of their countries.

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

  5. Out of Scope – Time Condition1% picked this

    A country's economic policies are the most significant factor determining whether that country's economy will

    The argument is about emerging from an economic recession, not the factors that lead to an economic recession.

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