Logical Reasoning

PT139 · S1 · Q7 The photographs that the store

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

The photographs that the store developed were quite unsatisfactory.

Conclusion

If the customer handled the film correctly, then the store owes her a refund.

Evidence

If the store doesn't process pictures properly, then the store owes a refund.

The pictures are unsatisfactory. The film wasn't defective. The camera wasn't defective.

Evaluate

The author us trying to combine the store's refund policy () with a Solve the Causal Mystery type argument in which he rules out other possible causes of the unsatisfactory pictures: - film defective - camera defective - handled improperly - not processed properly

Are we sure those are all the possible causes for unsatisfactory photographs?

Goal

The author is assuming that there are only these four possible causes of unsatisfactory photos. She thinks that if she rules out the other three, she is establishing that the store didn't process the photos properly, which means a refund is owed.

7.

The argument relies on assuming which one of the following?

  1. If the store owes the

    Reversed Logic

    This conditional looks like store owes refund ? ~defective cam & ~defective film Does that reflect the author's move from Premise to Conclusion? No. The stuff on the left is the Conclusion. The stuff on the right is from the Evidence.

    4% picked this

  2. Correct

    If neither the film nor

    Why this is right

    This expresses the idea that the author assumes that these four things are an exhaustive list of possible causes for unsatisfactory photos: bad film, bad camera, mishandled film, improperly processed photos. Does the author's argument match this flow? ~defective camera + ~defective film ? processed improperly + handled film properly Yes. The author introduced a rule that triggers "store owes refund", and the author concluded that "store owes refund", so the author is definitely assuming the rule got triggered: that the store didn't process the pics properly. The author gets there by ruling out two things and then conditionally stipulating that if a third thing is true, then a refund is owed.

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

    87% picked this

  3. If pictures are taken with

    Opposite Logic

    The author is thinking if it wasn't a defective must be that the camera (and a couple ? store processed the other things) pics improperly This answer is doing the classic Fake Opposite, where they just flip both ideas: if it WAS defective ? WASN'T processed improperly

    1% picked this

  4. If the customer handled the

    Bad Premise/Conclusion Match Opposite

    This takes ideas the author is presenting or implicitly assuming them and flips them. The easiest way to think about why this answer is wrong is that the author only talked about what would be true "if the customer handled the film correctly". The author doesn't say anything about what would be true if the customer didn't handle the film correctly. Seeing this answer flip the positive/negative status of that "if" should be enough to get rid of it. The author doesn't have to assume that if the film was handled incorrectly that this definitely caused the bad pics. It's possible that the film was handled incorrectly and it was also processed improperly, and that the latter caused the pics to come out bad.

    3% picked this

  5. If the customer's claim was

    Opposite Logic

    This literally takes the conclusion and performs an illegal negation, just flipping the values of each idea. If I conclude, "if we get pizza, the kids will be happy" I'm not assuming "if we don't get pizza, the kids will be unhappy" It's very possible that more than one thing will make them happy.

    5% 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