Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT153 S3 Q18 Explanation

In order to cut costs

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

TopicsSufficient Assumption

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

In order to cut costs and thereby maximize his profit, Mr. Kapp used inferior materials in constructing the library. Whether legal or not, it was clearly wrong for him to do so. For, as an experienced and knowledgeable action would put people at serious risk.

What this question is testing

Sufficient Assumption

Your task

Find the assumption that, if added, guarantees the conclusion follows.

Common trap

Answers that only partly bridge the gap, leaving the conclusion unproven.

Winning move

Identify the new term in the conclusion and pick the choice that links it to the evidence.

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

The question
18.

The argumentʼs conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following

Answer choices

  1. Unrelated to Goal14% picked this

    Any knowledgeable and experienced builder would realize that using the inferior construction materials that Mr. Kapp used would

    Since this answer doesn't say "it was wrong" or anything equivalent, it's of no use to us. Our task is to prove the idea of "it was wrong", and the argument never defined what "wrong" is, so the the correct answer must.

  2. Too Weak6% picked this

    An action can be wrong from a moral standpoint without necessarily

    This only helps one establish the possibility of something being wrong (an action can be wrong). We have to definitely prove it was clearly wrong.

  3. Unrelated to Goal1% picked this

    Mr. Kapp made a large profit from the construction and sale

    Since this answer doesn't say "it was wrong" or anything equivalent, it's of no use to us. Our task is to prove the idea of "it was wrong", and the argument never defined what "wrong" is, so the the correct answer must.

  4. Correct64% picked this

    It is wrong to knowingly put people at serious risk for the

    Why this is right

    This says knowingly put people at serious risk for the sake → it was wrong of profit Did Mr. K's action knowingly put people at serious risk for the sake of profit? Yup. "In order to maximize profit, Mr. K used inferior materials, and he must have realized that his action would put people at serious risk".

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

  5. Unrelated to Goal16% picked this

    Mr. Kapp either knew or ought to have known that using the inferior materials he used to build the library would

    Since this answer doesn't say "it was wrong" or anything equivalent, it's of no use to us. Our task is to prove the idea of "it was wrong", and the argument never defined what "wrong" is, so the the correct answer must.

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