QUESTION TEXT: Aisha: Vadim is going to be laid off. Vadim’s work…
QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption
CONCLUSION: Vadim will be laid off.
REASONING: The firm is going to lay off a programmer. The firm must lay off the most recently hired programmer.
ANALYSIS: You can solve sufficient assumption questions faster by drawing them. Draw the conclusion, split it apart, fill in the evidence, and spot the gap:
Conclusion: V ➞ L
Evidence: V RH ➞ L
The gap is between Vadim and being a recent hire. If we assume that Vadim is the most recent hire, then we prove the argument.
Note that some of the argument is fluff. The second sentence is a reason not to fire Vadim, but Aisha says that the company will fire him anyway. So you can just ignore the second sentence when diagramming, since it goes against what we’re trying to prove.
- This explains why the firm has a policy of firing the most inexperienced worker. But it doesn’t show the firm will fire Vadim.
- This shows that Vadim will understand the policy, if he’s fired. But it doesn’t show that he will be fired.
- CORRECT. If this is true, then Vadim will be fired. It fills the gap above: V ➞ RH
- So? The firm’s policy is clear: fire the most recent. Quality of work isn’t a factor. The fact that the stimulus mentioned Vadim’s exemplary work was just a distraction.
- It’s possible the policy is bad, and perhaps the firm should change it, later. But for now, Aisha says the firm must stick to its policy.
This argument is about what the firm will do, not what the firm should do.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly