LSAT 117 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q9

LR Question 9 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: In addition to the labor and materials used …

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption

CONCLUSION: Expensive wine isn’t always good wine.

REASONING: A wine’s price depends partly on the reputation of the vineyard, not just labor and materials.

ANALYSIS: The argument says:

Reputation affects price.

Therefore, expensive wine is not always good wine.

But this only works if reputation and quality are separate. What if a vineyard’s reputation always reflected the quality of its wines? Then reputation would simply be another indicator of quality, like labor and materials. In that case, an expensive wine could still always be a good wine.

It’s the same thing as saying: law school admissions depend partly on LSAT scores. Therefore, students admitted to top law schools aren’t always intelligent.

This only works if LSAT scores don’t perfectly measure intelligence (P.S. they don’t). If they did, the conclusion would fail.

Likewise, the argument needs to assume that a vineyard’s reputation is not always an accurate indicator of wine quality.

___________

1. The argument never says what price should reflect. It only claims that, as a matter of fact, expensive wines are not always good.
   Negation: The price of wine should not be a reflection of its quality.
2. Way too strong. The conclusion just says not always. It doesn’t require that price is never an indicator of quality.
   Negation: The price of wine can sometimes be an accurate indicator of its quality.
3. CORRECT. The argument depends on the possibility that a vineyard’s reputation can sometimes differ from the quality of its wines. If reputation always indicated quality, then reputation affecting price would not undermine the connection between price and quality.
   Negation: The reputation of a vineyard always indicates the quality of its wines.
4. The argument doesn’t need reputation to play a greater role than quality. Any role at all could potentially create a disconnect between price and quality.
   Negation: Reputation generally does not play a greater role than quality.
5. The argument says nothing about lesser-known vineyards. Their pricing practices are irrelevant.