LSAT 61, Logic Game 1, Question 5, LSATHacks

General “cannot be true” questions are hard. But, you can use past scenarios to disprove answers. If something worked on a past question, then it can’t be the answer.

This scenario from question 3 eliminates A:

Another way to eliminate answers is to ask if they are potentially fulfilling a rule, or not. E.g.:

B makes Hannah “not the driver”. This helps fulfill rules 1, which says Hannah is driven by Faith or Gus. (If Hannah was the driver, she obviously couldn’t be driven by someone else.)

C makes Juan “not the driver”. This helps fulfill rule 2, which says that Juan must be driven by Kenneth or Faith.

D, on the other hand, makes things harder, because Kenneth is normally a possible driver. Instead, D makes Kenneth unable to drive. Let’s see if we can make D work:

I made Faith the driver of the other car, and placed Hannah and Juan with Faith. This fulfills rules 1 and 2.

However, we still have to place Gus and Lisa together in a car (rule 3). This is impossible, as we have one space to fill in Kenneth’s car, and one in Faith’s. (And only GL are left)

So, D is CORRECT.

What about E? This diagram proves that it can work:

And if you think about, all E does is force us to place Gus in the car Lisa is in – which fulfills rule 3. We can then make Faith the driver in the other car, fulfilling rules 1 and 2.

Quick Jump PT Section Que