QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption
CONCLUSION: It is likely that the best drivers with a supervisor on-board are also the best drivers in normal conditions.
REASONING: All drivers are evaluated by supervisors and every driver is affected by their supervisor’s presence.
ANALYSIS: This is a bad argument. Many people react in different ways to the same situation. Some drivers might be very stressed by having their supervisor present. Some drivers might perform better because they want to show off. Some drivers might become nervous wrecks and crash their bus. Who knows?
The argument is assuming that all drivers react in a similar manner.
- It’s only necessary that the chosen method is fair. There could be other methods.
- The argument would still be fine if the supervisors were merely competent experts.
- This would be helpful, but it’s not necessary. The argument would still be fine if this were only true of 49% of drivers (49% is not most.)
- CORRECT. Here we go. If this isn’t true and all drivers are affected differently then the evaluations won’t be fair. Some drivers will perform poorly despite the fact that they are good drivers when no supervisor is watching.
- This isn’t necessary. It’s up to the supervisors to judge the drivers’ performance.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly