Logical Reasoning

PT135 · S2 · Q5 Lahar: We must now settle

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

Lahar: We must now settle on a procedure for deciding on meeting agendas.

Conclusion

We should have a majority vote on meeting agendas.

Evidence

Our options are unanimous vote, majority vote, or assigning to a committee. It’s unlikely we’d get unanimous consensus, and using committees has usually led to bad stuff.

Evaluation

We want to characterize the evidence or reasoning, to offer some general description of how the author arrived at her conclusion. She mentioned three options and then said bad things about two of them, settling ultimately on the remaining option.

Goal

Something to the effect of presented multiple options but then shot down all but one of them.

5.

Lahar's argument does which one of the following?

  1. rejects suggested procedures on constitutional

    Bad Premise Match

    She rejects two of the constitutional options by citing that one is unlikely to happen and the other has historically led to bad consequences.

    0% picked this

  2. claims that one procedure is

    Too Strong: “every”

    She claims that one procedure, majority vote, is appropriate for meeting agendas. She never claims it’s appropriate for every decision the club makes.

    2% picked this

  3. suggests a change to a

    Out Of Scope

    Out Of Scope: “change to a constitution” She never suggests that we change the constitution. She presents the three constitutional options and picks one of them as the best option.

    1% picked this

  4. Correct

    recommends a choice based on

    Why this is right

    Her conclusion is recommending that we go with majority vote. Her evidence, the basis for her conclusion, involved eliminating options like unaminous vote and committee.

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

    96% picked this

  5. supports one preference by arguing

    Bad Premise Match

    She does support one preference, but the evidence doesn’t involve personally attacking people who support other options.

    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.

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