LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning II, Q6, LSATHacks

LR Question 6 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: A first-term board member should not be on the finance…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle

PRINCIPLE:

First term board member ➞ accountant OR has support of full committee

Contrapositive:

Accountant AND Lacks Supports of at least one member ➞ Should not be first term member

ANALYSIS: This principle gives necessary conditions for being on the board as a
first term member.

If someone is on the board, we can conclude they should meet at least one of the necessary conditions. If someone fails to meet both, we can conclude they should not be on the board.

(They might still be on the board, of course. People do lots of things they shouldn’t do)

The principle says nothing about people who aren’t first term members. You can eliminate three wrong answers because they don’t specify ‘first term’.

___________

1. Simkins might still be ok, if he has the support of all committee members.
2. The principle was about first term members. We have no idea what rules apply to third term members like Timmins.
3. Ruiz could be a second or third term member. In that case, the principle wouldn’t apply to him.
4. CORRECT. Klein is a first term member, so the condition applies. Look at the contrapositive in the ‘principle’ section. If someone is not an accountant and lacks support from some members, they should not be on the committee.
5. We have no idea if this is true, because we don’t know if Maber is a first term member. The principle only applies to first term members.

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.