Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT137 S3 Q24 Explanation

Music critic: How well an underground

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

TopicsPrinciple-Strengthen

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

Music critic: How well an underground rock group's recordings sell is no mark of that group's success as an underground group. After all, if a recording sells well, it may be because some of the music on the recording is too trendy to be authentically underground; accordingly, many underground musicians consider it weak sales may simply be the result of the group's incompetence.

What this question is testing

Principle-Strengthen

Conclusion

The critic argues that you can't tell whether an underground rock group is successful from how well their records sell.

Evidence

The critic gives two reasons:

1. Selling well might mean their music is too trendy — so they're not really underground anymore.

2. Selling poorly might just mean they're bad at their craft.

Evaluate

For this argument to land, we need a rule that says: if a group is incompetent, they're unsuccessful, AND if their music is too trendy, they're unsuccessful. With both of those covered, sales numbers really do tell us nothing — high sales might mean trendy (= unsuccessful), low sales might mean incompetent (= unsuccessful).

Goal

Pick the principle that disqualifies both incompetent groups and trendy-music groups from being considered successful as underground groups.

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

The question
24.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the

Answer choices

  1. Bad Evidence Match9% picked this

    If an underground rock group is successful as an underground group, its recordings will sell neither especially

    This principle says successful underground groups have moderate sales — not high, not low. That actually claims sales are informative about success, which contradicts the conclusion. The argument says sales tell us nothing; this principle says sales tell us a lot. Wrong direction.

  2. Correct48% picked this

    An underground rock group is unsuccessful as an underground group if it is incompetent or if any of its music is too trendy

    Why this is right

    This is the principle that bridges the argument. It says a group is unsuccessful if it is incompetent OR if any of its music is too trendy (or both). That covers both of the critic's scenarios: weak sales due to incompetence → unsuccessful (so weak sales don't prove success); strong sales due to trendy music → unsuccessful (so strong sales don't prove success either). With this rule in place, sales numbers really don't mark success — exactly what the conclusion claims.

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

  3. Bad Evidence Match18% picked this

    Whether an underground group's recordings meet criteria that many underground musicians consider desirable is not a mark

    This says criteria many underground musicians find desirable are not marks of success. That's about desirability as a criterion, not about sales, and not about competence or trendy music. It doesn't link strong sales or weak sales to a non-success label, so it doesn't bridge to the conclusion that sales aren't a mark of success.

  4. Bad Evidence Match17% picked this

    An underground rock group is successful as an underground group if the group is competent but its recordings

    This principle says competent groups whose recordings don't sell well are successful. That makes weak sales (combined with competence) a positive marker of success — the opposite of what the conclusion claims. The conclusion says sales are not a mark of success at all, but this principle treats weak sales as part of the recipe for success.

  5. Bad Evidence Match9% picked this

    For an underground rock group, competence and the creation of authentically underground music are not in

    This says competence and authentic underground music are not, by themselves, marks of success. That's the wrong half of the argument — the argument needs to disqualify groups that are incompetent or that make trendy music. Saying "competence isn't enough" doesn't establish "incompetence makes you unsuccessful," which is what we need to handle the weak-sales case.

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