Logical Reasoning

PT15 · S2 · Q18 Everyone who is a gourmet cook

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

Everyone who is a gourmet cook enjoys a wide variety of foods and spices.

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

18.

The pattern of reasoning displayed in the argument above is most similar to that displayed in which one of the following?

  1. All of the paintings in

    Bad Evidence Match

    The two premises don't chain together, but even if they did the conclusion is not the contrapositive of that chain. It's actually just the A --> C connection of the chain itself. We know "if in H collection, then auctioned next week" and we know "the auction next week is by a wide variety of artists" but we can't turn that into a conditional, "If a painting is being auctioned next week, then it's by a wide variety of artists". That's basically nonsensical. Each painting is by one artist; the collection of paintings being exhibited is by a wide variety.

    2% picked this

  2. Correct

    All of the paintings in

    Why this is right

    Answer B is correct.

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

    73% picked this

  3. All of the paintings in

    Bad Evidence Match

    The two premises don't together. They both have the same trigger.

    13% picked this

  4. Every postimpressionist painting from the

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The two premises chain together, but the conclusion is not the contrapositive of that chain. It should say, "Hence none of the pop art paintings from the Huang Collection are postimpressionist paintings from the Huang Collection".

    9% picked this

  5. Every painting from the Huang

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The two premises chain together, but the conclusion is not the contrapositive of that chain. It should say, "Hence any paintings whose value is truly reflected in the auction price is NOT from the Huang Collection".

    3% picked this

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