LSAT 152 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q7

LR Question 7 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Editorial: Animated films appropriate for children are …

QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption

CONCLUSION: The new animated movies are not appropriate for children.

REASONING: Animated movies that are appropriate for children are not threatening. These new movies have dark themes like poverty and despair.

ANALYSIS: Let’s diagram this.

First sentence: Appropriate for children -> not threatening

We can also take the contrapositive: Threatening -> not appropriate for children.

Second sentence: New movies with dark themes -> not appropriate for children

We’re missing a link between dark themes and being threatening.

If we could show that dark themes (like poverty and despair) are threatening, then we can conclude that these movies are not appropriate for children.

This would look like:

Dark themes -> threatening -> not appropriate for children

___________

1. This just restates a premise we were already told.
2. Too broad. We’re talking about specific features of adult movies that make them inappropriate for children.
3. CORRECT. If dark themes are threatening, we can conclude that they’re not appropriate for children. This fills the gap.
4. Irrelevant. The argument is about what is appropriate, not what children enjoy.
5. Whether or not children pay attention to the movies isn’t relevant to conclude whether they’re appropriate for kids.