LSAT 120 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q9

LR Question 9 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Writer: I collaborated with another writer on my last book…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Strengthen

CONCLUSION: The author should collaborate with another writer on their next book (any other writer).

REASONING: The author’s recent book sold well, and it was produced as a result of collaboration.

ANALYSIS: This argument doesn’t prove much. We don’t even know if the collaborated-on book sold better or worse than the author’s other books. It sold well, but other books could have sold even better.

Further, there are other reasons the book could have sold well, apart from the collaboration. And collaboration with a different author might not produce the same results.

___________

1. The argument’s conclusion doesn’t specify that collaboration should be with the same writer. This is too narrow.
2. The conclusion is that the next book will sell well. This answer choice only tells us that collaboration is a necessary condition for good sales, not a sufficient condition.
3. CORRECT. This rephrases the conclusion in general terms, and certainly supports it.
4. Because this doesn’t offer a comparison to writers who do collaborate, this doesn’t help.
5. We don’t know if this guy or his collaborator are good writers.

Recap: The question begins with “Writer: I collaborated with another writer on my last book”. It is a Principle Justify question. Learn how to master LSAT Principle Justify questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.