Logical Reasoning · Method of Argument

PrepTest 124 · Section 2 · Question 12

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

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type

Method of Argument (dialogue response)

The one idea it tests

The second speaker attacks the hidden secret sauce, not the evidence or the conclusion directly.

The basic logic

Map the first speaker's burger. Find the unstated link between the evidence and the conclusion. Then see whether the reply targets that link by showing it might be false.

Tiny words that decide it

“since”
“can infer”
“could have”
“other than”

Playground logic

Marcus's patty says noisemakers were at the first parade; his top bun says kazoos were. The secret sauce is 'the noisemakers were kazoos.' Owen doesn't deny the photo or the conclusion head-on; he just pokes the sauce: plenty of other noisemakers existed.

Step 2 · The kid story

The Great Kazoo Question

Marcus holds up the dusty photo from the first-ever school parade. "A kazoo is a noisemaker, right? This photo shows kids holding noisemakers. So, case closed, kazoos were at the very first parade." Owen squints at the blurry picture. "Hold on, detective. I'm not saying the photo is fake. And I'm not saying kazoos weren't there. But lots of things are noisemakers. Whistles. Rattles. Pot lids with spoons." Kevin raises his hand. "Dinosaur roar boxes!" "Sure, Kevin. My point is, Marcus just assumed the noisemakers were kazoos." Priya nods over her juice box. "Owen went after the hidden step. The photo shows noisemakers, but which kind?" Marcus lowers the photo slowly. "I may need a sharper picture."

Step 3 · Try the model question

Marcus: A kazoo is a noisemaker. The photo from the first school parade shows kids holding noisemakers. So kazoos were at the first parade. Owen: That doesn't follow. Plenty of noisemakers besides kazoos could have been in that photo.

Owen responds to Marcus by doing which one of the following?

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Case of the Green Paint

The prosecutor waves a paint can. "Emerald Glow is a green paint. The fence was painted green. Therefore the defendant, who sells Emerald Glow, painted it." Mr. Whitfield stands. "Your Honor, I accept that the fence is green. I accept that Emerald Glow is green. But my friend has slipped in a step he never proved: that the green on this fence is Emerald Glow." He lifts a color chart. "Forty-two green paints sell in this town alone." The judge frowns at the prosecutor. "You assumed the very thing you needed to show." Mr. Whitfield sits, suspenders snapping. "Green is not a signature, Your Honor."

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 124, Section 2, Question 12 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Build the first speaker's burger: evidence on the bottom, conclusion on top. Ask what unstated link connects them. Now read the reply: does it dispute the evidence, the conclusion, or that hidden link? If the reply shows the link might not hold (by naming other possibilities), choose the answer describing an attack on an unstated presumption.