LSAT 17 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q11

LR Question 11 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: P: Because an elected officials needs the support…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Q concludes that the current legislator ought to have been effective since he had the support of a political party.

REASONING: Q reasons using P’s premise that a politician needs the support of a party to be effective.

ANALYSIS: Q has reversed P’s premise. P said that support from a party is a requirement to be effective in office. P did not say that support guarantees that a politician will be effective.

Support is a necessary condition yet Q mistakes it for a sufficient condition.

___________

1. Q does offer evidence: the politician has not been effective. It doesn’t work because Q got P’s claim backwards.
2. That’s a problem with P’s reasoning.
3. The meaning of effective is quite clear: someone who did the job satisfactorily.
4. This is a way of saying circular reasoning. Q wasn’t being circular: he brought in outside evidence about the politician’s performance.
5. CORRECT. This is a fancy way of saying mistakes a necessary condition for a sufficient condition.

Recap: The question begins with “P: Because an elected officials needs the support”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Flaw questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.