Logical Reasoning

PT155 · S2 · Q23 Kira: It would be unwise

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

Kira: It would be unwise for you to buy that insurance policy.

Kira's conclusion

It's unwise for you to buy that insurance policy.

Kira's evidence

It's designed to make the insurance company money. The prices are set to ensure profits.

Binh's response

I agree with your evidence (it's designed to make them money), but that doesn't in any way show it's unwise to buy it.

Evaluate

When Method questions involve one person responding to another, a lot of what LSAT likes to test is the area of disagreement. Did the 2nd person .. - disagree with the Conclusion? - disagree with the Evidence? (this almost never happens) - disagree with an Assumption? - just raise a further consideration?

Binh is definitely agreeing with Kira's premise, but he just thinks it's irrelevant when it comes to her conclusion.

He's presumably saying,

Goal

Look for an answer saying that Binh points out that Kira's evidence, while undeniably true, has no logical force when it comes to supporting the idea that a certain product would be an unwise purchase.

Binh hasn't said as much, but the common sense gist of his response is, "Sure ... isn't that true of any product?" He's sort of saying,

23.

Binh responds to Kira's argument by doing which one of the following?

suggesting that Kira has overlooked
Out of Scope: new fact
Binh doesn't present any new facts. He just says, "Yup, your premise is true, but it's garbage in terms of lending any support to your conclusion."
20% picked this
denying Kira’s premises while suggesting
Contradicted
Binh explicitly accepts Kira's premises. (in fact, I don't think I've ever seen a correct answer on Method of Response in which the 2nd person denied the truth of the 1st person's evidence)
3% picked this
arguing that Kira’s premises are
Bad 2nd Half
The first half of this is descriptively accurate, but Binh doesn't make any commentary on whether this specific insurance policy would / wouldn't be a wise purchase. He's only saying that Kira's reason for rejecting it is a completely hollow reason. He doesn't think that her reason actually points in the opposite direction.
8% picked this
Correct
conceding Kira’s premises without denying
Why this is right
Binh does indeed agree to (concede) that Kira's evidence is true. He just says it has no power to influence her conclusion, which means "her conclusion does not follow from her premises". His final sentence is basically saying this: The fact that [your premises] in no way implies [your conclusion]. And this answer is just saying it inverted: [Your conclusion] in no way follows from [your premises]
Skill tested: Method · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
68% picked this
observing that while Kira’s premises
Contradicted
Binh definitely does not think the premises support her conclusion. He explicitly says that "the mere fact that [your premise] in no way implies [your conclusion]." Also, saying that premises are inconsistent means that the premises actually contradict each other, which is an incredibly strong accusation that is (almost?) never right.
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.

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