Logical Reasoning

PT155 · S4 · Q4 Leona: Thompson’s article on

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

Leona: Thompson’s article on the novel Emily’s Trials is intriguing but ultimately puzzling.

Conclusion

Thompson's article is intriguing but ultimately puzzling.

Evidence

In one scene, he says that a character's furrowed brow indicates inner turmoil and anxiety.

Later, he says this same character in the same scene is a "self-identified agent", but he begins the article by saying that a "self-identified agent" is incapable of having misgivings or anxiety.

Evaluate

Leona is basically saying that this article contradicts itself.

The stimulus is a pretty dense one to get through. We have a clue in the first sentence that we should be looking for something that is "ultimately puzzling", and then the next two sentences say:

That pivot is creating the tension that is "ultimately puzzling" (just as pivot words are frequently used on Paradox questions).

In order to understand why there's tension, we need to make use of the definition of "self-identified" at the end of the paragraph. If we substitute in that definition, then those two sentences we were talking about are really saying,

Goal

Let's look for something like .

4.

The argumentative strategy Leona uses in discussing the article is to criticize Thompson's comments on the grounds that

  1. some of Thompson’s reasoning is

    Out of Scope: circular reasoning

    We're looking for something like Self-Contradiction (one of the 10 Famous Flaws), so this answer seems to be trying to entice us by naming one of the other 10 Famous Flaws, Circular Reasoning. Circular arguments have a premise that essentially restates the conclusion or requires the conclusion to be true. This didn't have anything like that.

    1% picked this

  2. Thompson provides no definition of

    Contradicted

    It says that Thompson "begins the article" by defining "self-identified agent" as someone who is fundamentally incapable of having misgivings or anxiety.

    1% picked this

  3. the analysis of character offered

    Out of Scope: insufficiently supported

    The author's complaint is that Thompson's article is puzzling (since she contradicts herself). This answer makes it sound like the complaint is that the article was insufficiently supported by evidence from the novel. We can't find anything in this paragraph that matches up with "insufficiently supported by the text".

    2% picked this

  4. it is unlikely that any

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: unlikely any could qualify Nothing in the passage sounds like, "there probably isn't anyone who qualifies as a self-identified agent". The author does say that "ascribing the label self-identified agent to the furrowed brow character is challenging in its own right", but that doesn't mean the author is saying "because that label probably describes no one".

    0% picked this

  5. Correct

    some of Thompson’s claims contradict

    Why this is right

    Thompson claimed this one character was feeling deep inner turmoil and anxiety. But Thompson later claims that this character is someone who is incapable of having misgivings or anxiety.

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

    97% 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