Logical Reasoning

PT23 · S3 · Q11 Editorial: The most vocal proponents

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

Editorial: The most vocal proponents of the proposed law are not permanent residents of this island but rather a few of the wealthiest summer residents, who leave when the vacation months have passed.

Conclusion (therefore)

Anyone who supports the proposed law is serving only the interests of a few outsiders at the cost of creating problems for the island’s permanent residents.

Evidence

The most vocal proponents of the law are wealthy summer residents who are not permanent inhabitants and, therefore, will benefit from the law without suffering its adverse effects.

These summer proponents enjoy the benefits while evading the law’s problems that would affect permanent residents.

Evaluate

This argument contrasts a small group of wealthy, nonresident summer residents with the island’s permanent residents. The evidence implies that while the outsiders enjoy only benefits, the law creates significant problems for the locals. For the conclusion—that supporting the law serves only outsider interests—to hold, the argument must assume that any potential benefits for permanent residents are overwhelmed by the negative consequences imposed on them.

Goal

We need an answer that assumes that even if the law provides some benefits to permanent residents, those benefits are minor compared to the problems it creates for them. In other words, for the conclusion to be valid, the law must impose net harms on the locals such that supporting it really amounts to favoring outsiders.

11.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

  1. The average income of the

    Irrelevant Comparison

    This answer choice addresses income differences between summer and permanent residents, but the argument’s focus is on the distribution of benefits and costs rather than on the relative income levels between the two groups.

    2% picked this

  2. Correct

    The problems associated with this

    Why this is right

    This answer choice is necessary because it establishes the assumption that even if the law confers some benefits on permanent residents, those benefits are outweighed by the problems it causes them. Without this assumption, one could argue that local residents might still gain overall, undermining the conclusion that support for the law solely serves outsider interests.

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

    73% picked this

  3. Most of the island’s summer

    Too Strong (most)

    The word 'most' is almost always wrong on Necessary Assumption, because does it really make a crucial difference to this argument whether 51% of summer residents benefit from the law, as opposed to 49%? No, that distinction would only matter if the author were claiming something about "most summer residents". In actuality, the author seems to be saying that the law will benefit "a few" outsiders".

    9% picked this

  4. Most of the island’s summer

    Too Strong (most)

    The word 'most' is almost always wrong on Necessary Assumption, because does it really make a crucial difference to this argument whether 51% of summer residents support the law, as opposed to 49%? No, that distinction would only matter if the author were claiming something about "most summer residents". In actuality, the author seems to be saying that the law will benefit "a few" outsiders". Saying "the most vocal proponents are outsiders" is not the same as saying "most outsiders are vocal proponents".

    3% picked this

  5. Most of the island’s permanent

    Too Strong

    Once again, the word "most" is an irrelevant piece of specificity. The argument doesn't care whether 51% of locals vs. 49% of them oppose the passage. The author is making a claim about whether the locals would benefit, not about whether they oppose it.

    13% 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