Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT155 S1 Q9 Explanation

Essayist: Practical intelligence is the ability

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

Essayist: Practical intelligence is the ability to discover means to ends. This ability is a skill—something that does not develop on its own. Thus, if there were a being that was never deprived of anything but was always and could never become intelligent in the practical sense.

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
9.

The conclusion of the essayist's argument can be properly drawn if which one of the

Answer choices

  1. Out of Scope: help of others3% picked this

    A being cannot acquire a skill without the help

    We want to prove that this hypothetical being will not acquire the skill of discovering means to ends. This answer says a hypothetical being will not acquire a skill without the help of others. Did the argument say whether this hypothetical being would / wouldn't have the help of others, when it comes to acquiring the skill of discovering means to ends? Nope. Since we don't know that this being will be "without the help of others", we can't use this rule to prove that the being will not discover means to ends.

  2. Correct61% picked this

    Skills are acquired only if they

    Why this is right

    We want to prove that this hypothetical being will not acquire the skill of discovering means to ends. This answer says a hypothetical being will not acquire a skill if the skill isn't needed. Did the argument say whether this hypothetical being would need the skill of discovering means to ends? It did not explicitly, but we're allowed to use our common sense here. The idea of "means to an ends" is the idea of "I want X (that's the end). How do I get X? (what's the means of getting it)" We normal people think, "I want a Tesla. How do I go about getting a Tesla" and in trying to figure out a way, we are discovering the means to an end. This hypothetical being says, "I want a Tesla", and a Tesla immediately appears. So she has no need to develop the ability of discovering the means to an end. She's got instant gratification for any end she desires. Since she has no need to discover how to get what she wants (she always and instantly gets what she wants), according to this answer she will never acquire the skill of being able discover how to get what she wants. Someone who is always instantly gratified never needs the ability to discover means to ends. So according to this answer, they will never acquire the ability to discover means to ends. So according to the first sentence, they will never have practical intelligence. Thus, we proved the conclusion.

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

  3. Too Weak20% picked this

    The best way to learn how to acquire something is to be

    Since our hypothetical being would never be deprived of anything, she would definitely not be learning to acquire the skill of discovering means to ends the best way. But that doesn't mean she wouldn't acquire the skill. This answer still leaves open the possibility that the hypothetical being might acquire the ability to discover means to ends.

  4. Unrelated to Goal9% picked this

    A being with practical intelligence would get what it wants entirely through the use of

    We want to prove that this hypothetical being will not acquire the skill of discovering means to ends, so that we can derive the conclusion that this being would not have practical intelligence. This has nothing to with that goal, and it's actually talking about people who do have practical intelligence, so it has nothing to with the conclusion either.

  5. Unrelated to Goal7% picked this

    If a being were always deprived of what it wanted, it could not

    We want to prove that a hypothetical being who is never deprived will not acquire the skill of discovering means to ends, so that we can derive the conclusion that this being would not have practical intelligence. This has nothing to with that goal, and it's actually talking about people who are always deprived, so it has nothing to with the conclusion either.

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