Logical Reasoning · Inference

PrepTest 113 · Section 3 · Question 17

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

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type

Inference

The one idea it tests

When an argument mocks a reason by showing lots of allowed things share the same feature, it is committed to the idea that the feature alone cannot justify a ban.

The basic logic

Find the reason the author rejects and why. If the rejection works by pointing to many accepted things with that feature, the safe inference is that the feature by itself is not enough. Pick the answer the author is stuck with, nothing stronger.

Tiny words that decide it

“almost everything”
“yet none”
“not enough”

Playground logic

Lulu wants glitter pens banned because they are messy. Tommy points out that paint, clay and glue are messy too, and nobody bans those. His patty only works if 'messy' all by itself is not enough reason to ban something, so that is what we can safely pack in the lunchbox.

Step 2 · The kid story

The Great Glitter Pen Debate

Lulu marched up to Ms. Rivera with her clipboard. 'Glitter pens should be banned from art class. They are messy!' Tommy, who loves glitter pens almost as much as candy, raised his hand. 'Ms. Rivera, everything in art class is messy. Finger paint gets on the ceiling. Clay ends up in Kevin's hair. Glue sticks to the cat, somehow.' Mr. Whiskers, sitting on the windowsill, did have a little glue on his paw. 'Nobody bans paint or clay or glue for being messy,' Tommy went on. 'Also, we have bigger problems, like the broken pencil sharpener. So glitter pens should stay.' Priya sipped her juice box and whispered to Lulu, 'Notice what Tommy is quietly committed to here. He thinks messy, all by itself, is never enough reason to ban an art supply.'

Step 3 · Try the model question

Some students say glitter pens should be banned because they are messy. But nearly every art supply is messy: paint, clay and glue all make a mess, and none of them is banned for it. Also, the class has more pressing problems. So glitter pens should not be banned.

Which one of the following follows from Tommy's reasoning?

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Case of the Squeaky Sneakers

Judge Opal Finch peered over her glasses. 'The gym club wants to ban squeaky sneakers because they are loud.' Mr. Whitfield snapped his suspenders. 'Your Honor, everything in a gym is loud. Whistles shriek. Basketballs boom. The bleachers groan like a sleepy bear. Not one of those is banned for being loud.' He paused. 'So squeaky sneakers should stay.' The judge nodded slowly. 'Then you are telling me that being loud, by itself, is never enough to ban something from this gym.' 'Exactly, Your Honor.' A sneaker squeaked in the back row. Nobody objected.

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 113, Section 3, Question 17 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Find the reason the author is rejecting and the conclusion the author reaches. Notice how the rejection works: usually by listing accepted things that share the same feature. Ask what the author must believe for that move to make sense. Then hunt for the answer that says the feature alone is not enough. Cross off answers that add new facts, rank problems the author never ranks, or stretch the claim to every case.