LSAT 4 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q20

LR Question 20 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Pamela: Business has an interest in enabling employees…

QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Lee concludes that child-care will not be to an individual company’s benefit if no other companies provide it.

REASONING: Though the children in question will be future customers, they will not be the only future clients of the business.

ANALYSIS: Basically Lee is pointing out that the benefits of childcare would be to society, but the costs would all be to the company.

___________

1. This is a valid objection, but we don’t have the same cost/benefit split as in the stimulus.
2. CORRECT. This has the same structure. Air is a common problem/benefit. Individual action is costly to the individual, while providing benefits to society.
3. As in A, there is no cost/benefit split here. The costs and benefits are all to the store.
4. Here the problems and benefits of lying are all issues for society, not individuals.
5. This is a good argument (the past doesn’t predict the future,) but it lacks the cost and benefit element of the stimulus.

Recap: The question begins with “Pamela: Business has an interest in enabling employees”. It is a Parallel Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Parallel questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.