Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT17 S3 Q23 Explanation

Arnold: I was recently denied a

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

TopicsPrinciple-Strengthen

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

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

Arnold: I was recently denied a seat on an airline flight for which I had a confirmed reservation, because the airline had overbooked the flight. Since I was forced to fly on the next available flight, which did not depart until two hours later, I missed an important business meeting. Even though should still pay me compensation for denying me a seat on the flight.

Jamie: The airline is not morally obligated to pay you any compensation. Even if you had not been denied a seat on the earlier missed your business meeting anyway.

What this question is testing

Principle-Strengthen

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question
23.

A principle that, if established, justifies Jamie’s response to Arnold is that an airline is morally obligated to compensate a passenger who has been denied a seat on

Answer choices

  1. Unrelated to Goal22% picked this

    if the only reason the passenger is forced to take a later flight is that the airline

    Unrelated to Goal: if Bad Conclusion Match As we mentioned earlier, a sufficient indicator won't help us. This answer creates a rule that looks like this, only reason passenger airline morally forced to take later flight ? obligated to is orig was overbooked compensate The right side doesn't match Jamie's conclusion, because she is saying the airline is not morally obligated to compensate.

  2. Bad Trigger Match18% picked this

    only if there is a reason the passenger is forced to take a later flight other than the original flight’s being

    Since this has the desired necessary indicator "only if", we'll immediately contrapose this so that we can get "airline not obligated to pay" on the right side, matching up with Jamie's conclusion. This rule says the reason the passenger is airline not forced to take later flight ? morally obliged IS because original flight to compensate was canceled for bad weather In the case of Arnold, was the reason he was forced to take the later flight because the original was canceled for bad weather? Nope. He was forced to take the later flight because the original was overbooked. Since the trigger doesn't match Arnold's situation, it's useless to us here.

  3. Correct44% picked this

    only if the passenger would not have been forced to take a later flight had the airline not

    Why this is right

    Since this has the desired necessary indicator "only if", we'll immediately contrapose this so that we can get "airline not obligated to pay" on the right side, matching up with Jamie's conclusion. This rule says the passenger would have airline not been forced to take later flight ? morally obliged even if original flight hadn't to compensate been overbooked In the case of Arnold, would he have been forced to take a later flight, even if the original flight hadn't been overbooked? Yes, because the original flight ended up being canceled for bad weather. Since the trigger matches Arnold's situation and the outcome matchers Jamie's conclusion, we've got a good answer.

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

  4. Unrelated to Goal4% picked this

    even if the only reason the passenger is forced to take a later flight were that the original flight is

    Unrelated to Goal: even if Bad Conclusion Match When we say "X even if Y", that just means that X happens no matter what, whether Y does or doesn't happen. So this rule is saying "the airline is obligated to compensate, even if [stuff]". A rule like that won't help us. It will be saying that the airline is obligated to compensate, whether or not [stuff] happens. That doesn't match Jamie's conclusion, because she is saying the airline is not morally obligated to compensate.

  5. Unrelated to Goal12% picked this

    even if the passenger would still have been forced to take a later flight had the airline not

    Unrelated to Goal: even if Bad Conclusion Match When we say "X even if Y", that just means that X happens no matter what, whether Y does or doesn't happen. So this rule is saying "the airline is obligated to compensate, even if [stuff]". A rule like that won't help us. It will be saying that the airline is obligated to compensate, whether or not [stuff] happens. That doesn't match Jamie's conclusion, because she is saying the airline is not morally obligated to compensate.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

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