Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT157 S3 Q14 Explanation

Food critic: One of the chief

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

TopicsFlaw

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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

Food critic: One of the chief competitors of Chris’s restaurant claims that Chris’s okra supplier cannot reliably supply fresh okra. If this claim were true, Chris’s customers could not count on getting good best seafood gumbo requires fresh okra.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Conclusion

No fresh okra, no good gumbo. Or so the food critic claims.

Evidence

The best gumbo needs fresh okra. But who said anything about the best? The conclusion is about good gumbo. Plenty of things can be good without being the best.

Evaluate

"Best" and "good" are not the same standard. A restaurant can make perfectly good gumbo without fresh okra — just not the absolute best gumbo. The argument smuggles in a higher standard than what the conclusion actually discusses.

Goal

Find the answer that catches the best-to-good switch.

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

The question
14.

The food critic’s argument is most subject to criticism

Answer choices

  1. Ad Hominem14% picked this

    relies upon testimony that is likely to

    The conclusion is conditional: if the claim is true, then the consequence follows. The argument does not assume the competitor's claim is true. It evaluates what would happen if the claim were true, which avoids the bias concern.

  2. Part vs. Whole7% picked this

    illicitly presumes that a dish must lack a certain quality if one of its ingredients

    This would apply if the argument claimed the gumbo is not fresh because the okra is not fresh. But the argument is about quality levels — best versus good — not about transferring a quality from ingredient to dish.

  3. Necessary vs. Sufficient15% picked this

    confuses a necessary condition for the best seafood gumbo with a sufficient condition for

    This claims fresh okra is treated as sufficient for good gumbo. But the argument does not conclude that having fresh okra guarantees good gumbo. It concludes that lacking fresh okra prevents good gumbo. The actual flaw is conflating what is necessary for the best gumbo with what is necessary for good gumbo.

  4. Correct63% picked this

    takes for granted that a necessary ingredient of the best seafood gumbo is also a necessary ingredient

    Why this is right

    The evidence establishes fresh okra as a necessary ingredient for the best seafood gumbo. The conclusion assumes fresh okra is also necessary for good gumbo. But the best and good are different quality thresholds. Good gumbo might be achievable without fresh okra — you just cannot make the best gumbo. This answer precisely identifies the unjustified assumption that what is necessary for the highest quality is also necessary for adequate quality.

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

  5. No Impact1% picked this

    fails to consider the possibility that on some days Chris’s might be serving seafood gumbo

    Even if Chris occasionally gets fresh okra, the conclusion is about customers being able to count on good gumbo reliably. Occasional availability does not address the reliability concern or the best-versus-good distinction that is the actual flaw.

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