Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT4 S4 Q8 Explanation

Prominent business executives often play

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

TopicsWeaken

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

Prominent business executives often play active roles in United States presidential campaigns as fund-raisers or backroom strategists, but few actually seek to become president themselves. Throughout history the great majority of those who have sought to become president have been lawyers, military leaders, or full-time politicians. This is understandable, for the personality executives tend to be uncomfortable with compromises and power-sharing, which are inherent in politics.

What this question is testing

Weaken

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion less likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that look negative but attack a claim the argument never relied on.

Winning move

Find the assumption the argument depends on, then pick the choice that undermines it.

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

The question
8.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the proposed explanation of why business executives do

Answer choices

  1. No Impact14% picked this

    Many of the most active presidential fund-raisers and backroom strategists are

    This has nothing to do with offering a different reason for why business executives avoid running for president. And it doesn't attack the story that it's because politics requires compromise and power-sharing, which executives are uncomfortable with.

  2. Correct76% picked this

    Military leaders are generally no more comfortable with compromises and power-sharing than

    Why this is right

    This is a stronger idea ("generally"). Most military leaders are no more comfortable with compromises and power-sharing than are business executives. Yet, military leaders commonly try to be president whereas business execs usually don't. So this hurts the plausibility of the author's causal explanation. CAUSE EFFECT uncomfortable not gonna w/ compromise > > run for and power sharing president This answer weakens with Cause w/o Effect data points. The military leaders have the same supposed Cause (discomfort with compromise and power sharing) but they don't experience the supposed Effect (avoid running for president).

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

  3. No Impact / Weak: some1% picked this

    Some of the skills needed to become a successful lawyer are different from some of those needed to

    This has nothing to do with offering a different reason for why business executives avoid running for president. And it doesn't attack the story that it's because politics requires compromise and power-sharing, which executives are uncomfortable with. It's just saying that being a good lawyer and being a good military leader have at least some differences, which is an obvious truth and weakly worded.

  4. No Impact / Weak: some7% picked this

    Some former presidents have engaged in business ventures after

    This has nothing to do with offering a different reason for why business executives avoid running for president. And it doesn't attack the story that it's because politics requires compromise and power-sharing, which executives are uncomfortable with. It's saying that at least one former president has engaged in business ventures after leaving office, but being engaged in a business venture is not the same as "being a business executive", so this idea really goes nowhere.

  5. No Impact / Weak: some1% picked this

    Some hierarchically structured companies have been major financial supporters of candidates

    This has nothing to do with offering a different reason for why business executives avoid running for president. And it doesn't attack the story that it's because politics requires compromise and power-sharing, which executives are uncomfortable with. It's just says that at least one hierarchically structured company donated to presidential campaign.

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