QUESTION TEXT: Political analyst: Several years ago, McFarlane…
QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption
CONCLUSION: Brooks won’t have many supporters.
REASONING: McFarlane is appointing Brooks. McFarlane’s opponents will oppose anyone in McFarlane’s government. McFarlane’s supporters will think Brooks is guilty of corruption.
ANALYSIS: This argument has two necessary assumptions:
- It assumes McFarlane’s supporters won’t support Brooks if they think Brooks is guilty of corruption. This might not be true.
- It assumes almost all people in the country either support or oppose McFarlane. If most people are indifferent, we don’t know what they would think of Brooks.
The answer uses the second assumption. You might have prephrased the first assumption and thought you made a mistake. You didn’t! It’s just that sometimes there are multiple flaws in an argument. Don’t get stuck on a single prephrase. It might be correct, but not the one chosen for the answer.
___________
- McFarlane’s government’s legitimacy doesn’t matter. This question is only about whether Brooks will be supported.
- “Less” could be 0.1% less. Who cares if there is 0.1% less corruption or not?
Negation: There is exactly the same level of corruption now as before. - Who cares? This has no impact on Brooks’ popular support.
Negation: Brooks and McFarlane agree on some issues. - CORRECT. We only have information about supporters and opponents of McFarlane. So if this isn’t true, then we have no information about what most people will think.
Negation: Fewer than half the country is either a supporter or opponent of McFarlane. - It doesn’t matter whether the charges were true. This question is about what people believe. Facts are separate from beliefs.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Memberbeccahope.weinstein@gmail.com says
Hi!
For this question, D jumped out at me because it was the only question that even mentioned supporters…during my timed PT my quick pre-phrase was just “I need something that enhances the analysts argument about the supporters.” Is that too simplistic? I’m afraid I’ll miss other questions if I’m letting myself be too simplistic in my pre-phrasing.
Memberbrianuhler10@gmail.com says
But even if most of McFarlane’s supporters think Brooks is corrupt, this doesn’t necessarily mean that they won’t support Brooks…
Greta says
I’m hoping that you can help me understand why we are confident that most people in the country aren’t indifferent toward McFarlane. This is why I didn’t select answer D.
Than you so very much,
Greta
TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says
That’s just it — based on the information provided in the stimulus, we aren’t confident that most of the people in the country are indifferent toward McFarlane. We have no data on how many people in the country are indifferent to, in support of, or in opposition to McFarlane.
That being said, if most of the people in the country were indifferent to McFarlane, then the conclusion of the argument would not follow from the premises. That’s because we don’t know what people who are indifferent to McFarlane think of Brooks. So, (D) is a necessary assumption for the argument: it ensures that most of the people in the country are people whom we know are in support of/opposition to Brooks.