LSAT 151 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q25

LR Question 25 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Keeler wanted the institute to receive bad publicity …

QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Keeler notified the press.

REASONING: Only him and Greene could have done it, but Greene had no reason to do so. Keeler wanted the institute to receive bad publicity.

ANALYSIS: Only two possible people could have done X. One lacked motive, while the other had it. So the person with motive must have done X.

That’s the structure we want to mirror.

___________

1. Both people had reason, but one has a past pattern of similar behavior. That’s not the same as choosing between two people where only one had motive.
2. This is close, but it says both had motive, then rules one out because of fear. The original says only one had motive in the first place.
3. CORRECT. Only Helms and Lapinski had access. Helms had reason to do it, and Lapinski did not. Therefore Helms did it. It’s the same structure as the stimulus.
4. This uses failure to take credit to rule out one person. That’s not the same as motive/no motive.
5. This predicts who will be chosen based on qualifications and connections. It is not about identifying who did something from exclusive opportunity + motive.