Logical Reasoning

PT155 · S4 · Q11 When using a manufactured

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

When using a manufactured pattern to make clothing, a tailor alters the pattern to accommodate any future distortion of the fabric.

Conclusion

A professional tailor never blindly follows a pattern, but always adjusts the pattern to fit the wearer exactly.

Evidence

(unless = if not) clothing isn't worn by tailor alters someone whose measurements → the pattern precisely match the pattern, to fit person

Evaluate

This might be the type of Sufficient Assumption argument where we don't really see the missing link, and instead we need to argue the Anti-Conclusion to figure out where there is still wiggle room.

GIVEN THAT a tailor will always adjust a pattern to a wearer, unless the person's measurements exactly match the pattern

HOW COULD WE ARGUE THAT there are at least some cases in which a professional tialor does not adjust the pattern to the wearer exactly?

It seems like our objection could be,

Goal

Since this argument is only vulnerable to one objection (what about people whose measurements fit the pattern precisely), the correct answer should be Ruling Out that one possible objection.

Let's look for something like "people's measurements never match the pattern precisely".

11.

The conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

  1. Most manufactured patterns do not

    Unrelated to Goal

    This is dealing with language from the first sentence, which was really just tangential background. Since the Conclusion is about always adjusting a pattern to fit wearer, we're just concerned with activating that conditional in the 2nd sentence that allows us to say "the tailor alters the pattern to fit the wearer". The about "altering the pattern to accommodate any future distortion" is a different alteration and not the concern of this conclusion.

    17% picked this

  2. At least some tailors who

    Too Weak / Irrelevant

    We should be highly dubious on Sufficient Assumption of picking any answer that isn't of certain strength. We need to 100% prove the conclusion, so "some / most" type ideas won't be solid enough (unless the conclusion we're trying to prove is only about some/most). This answer has nothing to do with our goal, which is to be convinced that nobody ever matches the measurements on the pattern precisely.

    19% picked this

  3. The best tailors are those

    Trap

    Unrelated to Goal Out of Scope: best We should always be scared to pick any Sufficient Assumption answer that brings in new concepts (and thus new loose ends), such as "the best tailors". The conclusion is about all professional tailors, so learning about only the best ones would not be exhaustive enough to help us prove the conclusion.

    4% picked this

  4. Correct

    All professional tailors sew only

    Why this is right

    This answer removes the one possible objection to the conclusion, thereby proving the conclusion. If a professional tailor is sewing for someone, this answer tells us that we can be positive that the wearer has measurements that do not exactly fit the chosen pattern. And if clothing is to be worn by someone whose measurements don't precisely match the pattern, the tailor alters the pattern to fit them exactly. Thus, pro tailors always adjust the pattern to fit the wearer exactly.

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

    51% picked this

  5. A professional tailor can always

    Unrelated to Goal

    This is dealing with language from the first sentence, which was really just tangential background. Since the Conclusion is about always adjusting a pattern to fit wearer, we're just concerned with activating that conditional in the 2nd sentence that allows us to say "the tailor alters the pattern to fit the wearer". We need to be convinced that there aren't people whose measurements already fit the pattern and thus create a situation in which a professional tailor wouldn't be adjusting a pattern to fit the wearer exactly.

    9% 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