Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT151 S2 Q22 ExplanationCounselor: To be kind to someone

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

TopicsMust be False

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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

Counselor: To be kind to someone, one must want that person to prosper. Yet, even two people who dislike each other may nevertheless treat each other with respect. And while no two people who dislike each other can be fully content in each other’s each other will be kind to each other.

What this question is testing

Must be False

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.

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

The question
22.

If the counselor’s statements are true, then which one of the following

Answer choices, explained

  1. No Contradiction7% picked this

    Some people who like each other are not fully content in

    If this said "some people who dislike each other can be fully content in each other's presence", it would contradict something we know. If people like each other (or don't dislike), that only guarantees that they'll be kind and they'll want each other to prosper.

  2. Correct39% picked this

    Some people who are fully content in each other’s presence do not want each

    Why this is right

    This is rewarding us for having assembled the whole chain. If people are fully content in each other's presence, that guarantees that they don't dislike each other, are kind to each other, and want each other to prosper. This answer contradicts that last implication.

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

  3. Provides a Valid Inference22% picked this

    Some people who treat each other with respect are not fully content in

    This is what we said we could infer from combining "if you dislike each other --> not fully content" with "it's possible to dislike but still treat with respect".

  4. No Contradiction23% picked this

    Some people who want each other to prosper dislike

    If people dislike each other, then it must be true that they're never fully content in each other's presence (and that at least once they've treated each other with respect). That's all we know, so anything else we say about people who dislike each other is up for grabs. Could be true, who knows.

  5. No Contradiction10% picked this

    Some people who are kind to each other do not treat each

    If people are kind to each other, the only thing we know for sure is that they want each other to prosper. Anything else is up for grabs, so not being respectful to each other could be true.

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