Logical Reasoning

PT157 · S3 · Q2 Banking industry visionaries foresee

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

Banking industry visionaries foresee a bright day in the near future when customers will be able to transact all their financial business by means of computers or telephones from the comfort of their own homes.

Conclusion

That may be more of a paradise for banks than for their customers.

rephrase: Transacting all financial business from home by means of computers or telephones may be something that benefits banks more than customers.

Evidence

As banks eliminate their branch offices and customer-service employees, customers will have to serve as their own tellers—and pay more transaction fees for their efforts.

Evidence

Whenever we do Main Conclusion / Role, we read the paragraph differently, since more than 80% of these are Upside Down Arguments where the conclusion arrives before the support.

65% of them are Pivot / Rebuttal 25% are First Sentence Conclusions

As soon as we see the first sentence is starting with an Attribution, we'd get ready for a Pivot/Pushback type of conclusion, and that's exactly what we get with the 2nd sentence. The 3rd sentence supports why this new future would be more paradisal for banks than for customers.

Goal

We just want a meaning-match for the 2nd sentence, so .

2.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the argument?

  1. In the near future, bank

    Opposing Idea

    This answer essentially matches the 1st sentence, which was the opposing attribution. We want a match for the 2nd sentence, which is a comparison between banks and their customers.

    1% picked this

  2. Correct

    Enabling bank customers to transact

    Why this is right

    This answer accurately paraphrases the author's conclusion from the second sentence.

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

    90% picked this

  3. As banks eliminate branch offices

    Premise

    This matches the 3rd sentence. We're looking for a match for the 2nd sentence. Main Conclusion questions usually have a trap answer that sounds like the last idea of the stimulus (because students often default into assuming the final claim is the Conclusion, even though that's true less than 20% of the time on Main Conclusion / Role).

    6% picked this

  4. Eliminating branch offices and customer-service

    Too Specific

    This idea was never stated, so we wouldn't like it on a Main Conclusion question where there was an explicit conclusion. The author is definitely assuming this, so it feels true, but it's not our task. We're here to match the 2nd sentence, which is a comparison between banks and their customers (this answer is not).

    2% picked this

  5. Enabling customers to transact all

    Word Salad

    This idea was never stated, so we wouldn't like it on a Main Conclusion question where there was an explicit conclusion. The author is definitely assuming this, so it feels true, but it's not our task. We're here to match the 2nd sentence, which is a comparison between banks and their customers (this answer is not).

    1% 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