Logical Reasoning

PT4 · S1 · Q5 Economic considerations color every aspect

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

Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings, and nations are just like individuals in that the lender sets the terms of its dealings with the borrower.

Premise 1

Economic considerations color every aspect of international dealings.

Premise 2

Nations are like individuals: the lender sets the terms of its dealings with the borrower.

Conclusion

Therefore, a nation that owes money to another nation cannot be a world leader.

Evaluate

The argument moves from "the lender sets the terms" to "the borrower cannot be a world leader." The missing link: a nation cannot be a world leader if another nation sets the terms of its dealings. Without that connection, the lender-borrower relationship has no implication for world leadership.

Goal

The correct assumption should connect "having one's terms set by another nation" to "cannot be a world leader."

5.

The reasoning in the passage assumes which one of the following?

  1. A nation that does not

    Bad Assumption

    The argument is about debtor nations, not non-lenders. The conclusion concerns nations that owe money — it does not require that not lending rules out world leadership. A nation could refrain from lending without owing anything; the argument has no claim about such nations.

    3% picked this

  2. A nation that can set

    Too Strong

    This is too strong and goes the wrong direction. The argument needs that being a debtor excludes world leadership, but it does not need that setting terms guarantees world leadership. The argument can stand even if some nations set terms but are not world leaders.

    7% picked this

  3. Correct

    A nation that has the

    Why this is right

    This is the missing link. The argument established that a debtor nation has its terms set by the lender nation. To get to the conclusion that a debtor nation cannot be a world leader, we need: a nation that has its terms set by another nation cannot be a world leader. Plug that in and the conclusion follows. Negate it (some nation that has its terms set by another nation can be a world leader) and the argument falls apart — being a debtor would not necessarily block world leadership.

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

    86% picked this

  4. A nation that is a

    Bad Assumption

    This says a world leader can borrow as long as the lender does not set the terms. But the argument premise is that lenders always set the terms — so this scenario contradicts the very premise the argument relies on. Even setting that aside, the argument needs to exclude debtors from leadership, not carve out exceptions allowing them in.

    3% picked this

  5. A nation that has no

    Bad Assumption

    The argument is about nations that owe money to other nations — not about nations that have no dealings at all. It says nothing about whether complete isolation rules out world leadership. The argument does not depend on this claim.

    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