VIPLSATCracking LSAT makes you a VIP.

Logical Reasoning · Method of Argument

PrepTest 124 · Section 2 · Question 9

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
The one idea it tests
In a two-speaker exchange, describe what the second speaker does to the first speaker's explanation, not what the second speaker could have done.
The basic logic
Speaker one explains a pattern with a cause and relies on a link between them. Speaker two does not offer a new cause or dispute the data; instead, they say the link might be coincidence and that the proposed mechanism is poorly supported. The method: calling the first explanation unsupported.
Tiny words that decide it
  • “skeptical”
  • “coincidence”
  • “speculative”

Playground logic

Frankie says the crumbs near Biscuit's bed prove Biscuit raided the cookie jar. Sharon replies that crumbs near the bed may be a coincidence and the idea that Biscuit can open the jar is a wild guess. Sharon is not naming a new suspect; she is saying Frankie's story lacks support.

Step 2 · The kid story

Who Ate the Cookies?

Half the cookies vanished from the jar. Frankie pointed at Biscuit's bed. 'Crumbs! Right next to his blanket. Biscuit did it. Dogs can nose open cookie jars when they're hungry.' Sharon folded her arms. 'Crumbs near his bed could just be a coincidence. People eat snacks in this room all the time. And the idea that Biscuit can open that jar with his nose is a wild guess. Have you ever seen him do it?' Frankie paused. 'Well, no.' Marcus jumped up. 'So Sharon thinks Tommy did it!' Lulu shook her head. 'She never named anyone. She just said Frankie's story isn't backed up.' Tommy quietly moved a cookie deeper into his pocket. Biscuit wagged his tail, innocent for once.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Frankie: The crumbs next to Biscuit's bed show that Biscuit ate the missing cookies. Dogs can nose open cookie jars when they're hungry. Sharon: The crumbs being near his bed could easily be a coincidence. And the claim that Biscuit can open that jar is just a guess.

Sharon responds to Frankie by

Choices

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Case of the Humming Fence

In a fictional neighborhood hearing, Ms. Grant testified that the strange humming at night came from the new electric fence, since the noise reports clustered right near it. The fence owner's lawyer, Mr. Whitfield, stood up. 'Your Honor, I am not offering a different source. I am saying the clustering may be coincidence, since that block is also the busiest. And the idea that this kind of fence can hum at all has no real testing behind it.' Judge Park leaned forward. 'So you are not disputing the reports, and you are not naming a new culprit.' 'Correct. I am saying her explanation is not supported.' 'Understood.'

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 124, Section 2, Question 9 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Summarize the first speaker's explanation and what it depends on. Then ask what the second speaker actually does: accept, deny, offer a rival, question the facts, or doubt the support. Describe that move in abstract words before reading choices. Match the choice that fits every part of the response. Eliminate choices describing moves the second speaker never makes.