Logical Reasoning · Weaken

PrepTest 111 · Section 1 · Question 13

Phase 1 (your first ~400 questions): read the guidance, then answer. No clock.

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type

Weaken

The one idea it tests

Show the 'no reason left' claim is false: there was another reason.

The basic logic

The argument says people kept a view even though its support was gone, so they hold views with no good support. Pop it by showing the people had picked up other good support before the original was pulled.

Tiny words that decide it

“even after”
“absence”
“any”
“most”

Playground logic

Marcus says Biscuit kept waiting by the back door after the treat jar was moved, so Biscuit waits for no reason. But if Grandpa had started serving dinner by that door, Biscuit had a fresh reason. The 'no support at all' top bun pops.

Step 2 · The kid story

Biscuit and the Back Door

Grandpa used to keep Biscuit's treat jar by the back door. Last week he moved it to the kitchen. Biscuit still sits by the back door every evening. Marcus nodded wisely. "Proof that dogs keep habits even with zero reason. The treats are gone!" Lulu checked her clipboard. "Grandpa started putting Biscuit's dinner bowl by the back door two weeks ago. Before he moved the jar." Marcus blinked. "So by the time the treats left, Biscuit already had a new reason to sit there?" "A good reason," said Priya. "Dinner." Owen laughed. "So it's not a reasonless habit. He's just hungry at the right spot." Mr. Whiskers watched from the windowsill, unimpressed. Marcus crossed out "zero reason" in his notebook.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Grandpa used to keep Biscuit's treats by the back door. After Grandpa moved the treats to the kitchen, Biscuit kept sitting by the back door each evening. So dogs keep their habits even when nothing at all supports them.

Assuming it is accurate, which choice does the most damage to the argument?

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Case of the Stubborn Customers

A bakery owner was accused of tricking customers. The prosecutor said, "A sign once claimed her muffins won a prize. The sign was wrong. Yet customers kept buying. They believe in her muffins with no good reason!" Mr. Whitfield stood. "Your Honor, by the time the sign came down, those customers had already tasted the muffins dozens of times." The judge raised an eyebrow. "So they had their own evidence." "Delicious evidence," said Whitfield. "The sign was gone, but the reason was not." The prosecutor sat down. The judge ordered a muffin for the record.

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 111, Section 1, Question 13 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Find the top bun: people keep a view without any credible support. Notice the gap: the original support was removed, but was it the only support? The best weakener shows that before the original support was pulled, the people had gained some other solid backing for their view. Skip choices about whether the view happened to be true, about the original statements' quality, or about how people felt at first.