LSAT 149 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q9

QUESTION TEXT: Ted, a senior employee, believes he is underpaid…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Justify

CONCLUSION: Tatiana doesn’t request a replacement for Ted.

REASONING: Ted doesn’t work the hours he’s supposed to, because he thinks he is underpaid. But Ted does make some valuable and possibly unique contributions.

ANALYSIS: “Tatiana’s decision” was the decision not to ask to fire Ted. So we have to justify her and show Ted shouldn’t be fired. This means the answer must say when we should or shouldn’t fire someone. The right answer must have “do not fire” as the necessary condition in order for us to conclude it.

Ted does unique work. That sounds like a reason not to replace him. Look for an answer like this:

Valuable work ➞ Don’t replace

The key is we need “don’t replace” in the necessary condition. The answer could also be in the contrapositive form, like this:

Replace ➞ no unique work

Reverse and negate that and we get “unique work ➞ don’t replace”, which also lets us conclude not to fire Ted. Knowing exactly what to look for in the necessary condition can help you eliminate distracting answers faster.

Most of the wrong answers don’t even talk about firing, and are definitely wrong. The stimulus doesn’t say when you should fire someone, so the right answer has to mention when to fire.

___________

1. CORRECT. This says “replace ➞ other employee can do work”. Ted’s work is unique, so no other employee can replace him. The condition applies, and if we take the contrapositive the conclusion is not to replace him: “No other employee can do work ➞ don’t replace”
2. This talks about how to pay Ted. We’re deciding whether to fire Ted.
3. This is a distracting answer. Tatiana wasn’t deciding whether to fire Ted herself. She was deciding whether to ask for him to be replaced. Presumably she would be asking her superior.
4. This is advice for Ted. We’re supposed to decide whether to fire Ted, not how to advise him.
5. This doesn’t say whether to fire Ted! We’re supposed to decide whether to get rid of him, not how to judge his performance. If an answer doesn’t directly talk about firing, it can’t be right.

Recap: The question begins with “Ted, a senior employee, believes he is underpaid”. It is a Principle Justify question. Learn how to master LSAT Principle Justify questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.

Quick Jump PT Section Que