VIPLSATCracking LSAT makes you a VIP.

Logical Reasoning · Flaw

PrepTest 126 · Section 3 · Question 2

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

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type
Flaw
The one idea it tests
A rule forbids doing something harmful. The arguer treats NOT doing something helpful as if it broke the rule.
The basic logic
Find the exact condition. Then find what actually happened. Check whether the evidence matches the condition, or whether the arguer slid from "did not help" to "did harm" without showing it.
Tiny words that decide it
  • “condition”
  • “not”
  • “never”
  • “hence”

Playground logic

Aunt Rosa's only rule is "don't bring the scooter back damaged," and Marcus says Tommy broke it because he didn't polish the scooter. The patty (no polishing) is about helping, but the top bun (broke the rule) is about harming. The secret sauce is that "not improved" means "damaged," which is a Scope Shift.

Step 2 · The kid story

The Scooter Deal

Aunt Rosa lent Tommy her shiny red scooter for the weekend. "One rule," she said. "Do not bring it back damaged." Tommy rode it to the park, rode it home, and parked it carefully in the garage. On Sunday, Marcus walked around the scooter with a magnifying glass. "Aha!" he said. "You never polished it. You never pumped the tires. You didn't even wipe the handlebars. You broke the deal, Tommy." Lulu checked her clipboard. "The deal says don't damage it. It doesn't say make it nicer." Priya nodded. "Not making something better is not the same as making it worse. Marcus needs to show a scratch or a dent. All he showed is that Tommy didn't do any extra favors." Tommy looked relieved and quietly hid a candy bar in the glove box.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Aunt Rosa lent Tommy her scooter on the condition that he not return it damaged. Tommy did not polish the scooter or pump its tires. So, Marcus says, Tommy has broken the condition of the loan.

Marcus's reasoning is most open to criticism because it

Choices

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Silent Neighbor

A homeowners' rule said: "No resident may do anything that lowers the value of the street." Mrs. Darby was sued by the street committee. Their lawyer said, "In ten years, Mrs. Darby never planted one flower. She never painted her fence a cheerful color. She broke the rule!" Mr. Whitfield stood up and adjusted his suspenders. "Your Honor, the rule forbids lowering the value. It does not require raising it. Did she dump trash? Did she knock down a tree? No. My client simply did no extra favors." The judge tapped her pen. "Not adding is not subtracting. Case dismissed."

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 126, Section 3, Question 2 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Underline the condition and say it in plain words: what does it forbid or require? Then underline the evidence. Ask whether the evidence shows the forbidden thing, or only shows something weaker or different. Name the gap between the two. Find the choice that describes that exact gap. Skip choices that describe moves the arguer never made (Phantom Pieces), or that talk about what could happen later.