QUESTION TYPE: Must False (Could be true except)
CONCLUSION: Maples would be a better mayor than Tannett.
REASONING: Maples is the mayoral candidate for the Modern Party. All Modern Party members are better qualified than any Traditionalist Party members. Tannett is in the Traditionalist Party.
ANALYSIS: On a must be false question, you must focus on the facts. All we know is that modern is better than traditional.
So what must be false? A Traditionalist Party member being a better mayor than a Modern Party member.
The wrong answers will all be things that could be true, so don’t waste much time thinking about them. They’re talking about things we don’t have information about.
- Seniority isn’t mentioned. So this could be true.
- Who knows? The argument doesn’t compare Traditionalist Party members against each other.
- The chairperson doesn’t mention what people believe. So anything could be true.
- Same as B. We have no idea how members of the modern party rank against each other.
- CORRECT. See the analysis above: this contradicts the only fact we know. You might have noticed that the chairman didn’t technically say that Maples is a member of the Modern Party. So you have to make the assumption that Maples is a member of the party he is a candidate for. But that’s an incredibly reasonable assumption. Increasingly, the LSAT requires you to make these common sense assumptions.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions