LR Question 17 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: The Green Ensemble, a nonprofit theater group, has always been…
QUESTION TYPE: Must be True
FACTS:
- The Green Ensemble would have stopped if any corporate sponsors withdrew funding this year.
- The Green Ensemble has kept going.
- The ensemble posted a schedule for next year, but we don’t know why or how.
ANALYSIS: It must be true that the none of the Green Ensemble’s sponsors withdrew funding. Otherwise the group would have been forced to shut down.
Note: We only know that this year, the group would have had to withdraw. As for next year…we have no idea why the group is so confident about their schedule. Maybe they no longer need funding.
___________
- CORRECT. If any sponsors withdrew, the ensemble would have had to shut down.
- We have no idea how the group is able to keep going next year.
- Not necessarily. We only know that no sponsors pulled out.
- We know the ensemble is dependent on corporations. But they might get 60% of their money from government, and be dependent on corporations for the other 40%.
- This is way too general. We only have information about the Green Ensemble, not all theatre groups.
Recap: The question begins with “The Green Ensemble, a nonprofit theater group, has always been”. It is a Must be True question. Learn how to master LSAT MBT questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.
More Resources for Must Be True Questions
- Conditional Reasoning Article: Learn about conditional statements on the LSAT.
- LR Diagrams Guide: Learn how to draw LR diagrams.
- Intro to Conditional Reasoning: This intro course lesson covers conditional reasoning basics.
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Must Be True questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers must be true questions.
Can you better explain why B is incorrect? Both A and B seem correct to me and I am confused.
Yes, of course! Sorry for the late response btw.
Note that the question is asking us which answer choice can be “properly drawn from the information above” (i.e. what can we conclude from the information given in the stimulus).
So let’s look at the information given to us:
1. If any sponsors withdraw support → forced to disband this year.
2. They have continued in operation this year.
3. They have announced the schedule for next year.
We don’t know anything about what their funding plans are next year. The passage only allows us to conclude that none of their sponsors withdrew their support since they were able to continue to operate (answer A). It does not mention anything about the group finding other sources of funding or becoming less dependent on corporate sponsors. That is certainly a possibility; but it is not something we can conclude from the information given – it is an assumption.
They could have announced the schedule for next year based on long-term commitments from current sponsors, or from finding venues and costumes that are free. The point is we don’t know. So we can’t conclude B.