Logical Reasoning

PT138 · S3 · Q25 Alissa: If, as the mayor says

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

Alissa: If, as the mayor says, the city can no longer continue to fund both the children's museum and local children's television programming, then it should cease funding the television programming.

Alissa's 1st Claim

If the city can no longer fund both the kids museum and kids TV programming, it should stop funding the TV programming. Does Greta disagree? Is she arguing that if the city needs to make a choice, they should choose to keep TV programming and stop funding the kids museum?

Yes! She explicitly says that.

Alissa's 2nd Claim

The interactive character of the exhibits makes for a richer (more active) educational experience than watching TV, which is largely passive. Does Greta disagree? Is she arguing that the exhibits at the museum are not more rich and active than passively watching TV?

No, she doesn't talk about that comparison at all.

Evaluate

We know that Greta disagrees with Alissa's 1st claim and is silent on Alissa's 2nd claim.

In fact, the disagreement is so apparent and explicit, that I would suspect the answers will go one layer deeper. When there is a very obvious and explicit disagreement, then the correct answer usually compares the reasons each person had for reaching their position.

Person 1: I think Harvard is the best law school because its grads are most likely to be President or appointed to SCOTUS. Person 2: I think Stanford is the best law school because its grads make the highest average salary in their first job.

Rather than giving us an easy, superficial answer like, They disagree over which law school is the best

the correct answer will compare reasons, like Average first job salary is a better determinant of a law school's quality than is likelihood of holding prestigious government positions

Goal

So in this case, we know the superficial debate is .

But the underlying debate is,

25.

On the basis of their statements, it can be inferred that Alissa and Greta disagree on which one of the following?

whether the city will need
No Support from Either
These two people are disagreeing about what we should do in the hypothetical case where we need to pick between museum and TV shows. Neither one of them offers any opinion about whether this eventuality is likely or unlikely. To the extent that they both seem to be implicitly trusting what the mayor says, it seems like they would both agree that the city can't afford to fund both, so if it continues funding one, it will cease funding the other.
4% picked this
whether the mayor has spoken
No Support from Either
Just like (A), this is discussing some background issue that neither person comments on. These two people are disagreeing about what we should do if the mayor has spoken truthfully. Neither one of them offers any opinion about whether the mayor has in fact spoken truthfully. To the extent that they both seem to be implicitly trusting what the mayor says, it seems like they would both agree that the mayor is being honest.
1% picked this
Correct
whether the city should cease
Why this is right
Alissa would say that, if continuing to fund kids TV would mean that the city would have to cease funding the museum, then we should cease funding kids tv. Greta would say that, if continuing to fund kids TV would mean that the city would have to cease funding the museum, then we should not cease funding kids TV ("we should stop funding the museum not (stop funding) the television programming"). This correct answer ended up testing the superficial, obvious disagreement of "Keep the museum vs. No, keep the kids TV", but they just found a really weird way to structure that debate. The reason this answer is structured as a conditional is that they're arguing about Alissa's first claim, which is a conditional!
Skill tested: Agree/Disagree · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
75% picked this
Whether local children's television programming
No Support from Person 1
Alissa never talks about the audience size of museum vs. kids programming, so we couldn't infer her opinion on this matter.
19% picked this
whether the children's museum provides
No Support from Person 2
This is Alissa's second claim, which Greta never acknowledged or pushed back against. We have no support for what Greta's opinion is on whether the museum does / doesn't provide a rich educational experience. She may well agree that it does, but still prefer the option of saving TV programming (either because it provides a richer experience or simply because it reaches a bigger audience).
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