LSAT 101 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q13

LR Question 13 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Carl’s Coffee Emporium stocks only two decaffeinated…

QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: If Yusef gets coffee from Carl’s, he served Mocha Java last night.

REASONING: Carl’s only sells Mocha Java and French Roast Decaf Coffee.

Yusef only serves decaf, and the smooth coffee he served last night couldn’t have been French Roast.

ANALYSIS: This is a good argument. The author eliminates competing possibilities one by one.

The conclusion is appropriately hedged: the author is aware that Yusef might have started buying coffee elsewhere.

___________

1. This is a bad argument. We’re not told why Samuel will take a convertible over a sedan. Maybe Samuel loves sedans?
2. This is a bad argument. Maybe Anna doesn’t mind mud.
3. This is a bad argument. Rose might hike the
   trail, but not complete it. Many people do that
   when hiking.
4. CORRECT. This is a good argument. The author eliminates the choice of sales. And the conclusion is hedged: the author is aware that Arno might not take either job.
5. This is a good argument, but it’s a bit different from the stimulus. The stimulus only mentioned two choices: Mocha Java, or coffee from another shop. This mentions three: firing assistant, keeping assistant, finding another solution.

Recap: The question begins with “Carl’s Coffee Emporium stocks only two decaffeinated”. It is a Parallel Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Parallel questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.