LSAT 154 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q7

LR Question 7 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Library policy: For a book to be removed from circulation…

QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption

CONCLUSION: Paper Flowers shouldn’t be removed from circulation.

REASONING: If a book is removed, it must be damaged and not checked out in over two years. If a book by a local author or is of historical significance is removed, then it must haven’t been checked out in over three years.

ANALYSIS: The stimulus gives us the conditions for if a book is removed. We need to take the contrapositives to get the conditions where a book wouldn’t be removed:

1. If checked out in last two years OR not damaged ➞ don’t remove
2. (Local author/historical significance) If checks out in last three years ➞ don’t remove

So we’re looking for a sufficient condition that would guarantee the conclusion to “not remove” Paper Flowers.

___________

1. If Paper Flowers is badly damaged, then it should be removed.
2. CORRECT. This matches our conditions. If Paper Flowers has been checked out within the last year (within “last two years”) then it should not be removed from circulation.
3. If it was checked out between 2-3 years ago, then it needs to be by a local author or have historical significance. But we don’t know if it’s local or has significance. Since the question stem asks for “fully justifies”, B is a better answer choice.
4. This says Paper Flowers was written by a local author but doesn’t say when was the last time it was checked out. If it hasn’t been checked out within the last three years, then it would not be fully justified.
5. The reasoning for this is the same as D. Even if it’s of historical significance, we still don’t know when it was last checked out.

Recap: The question begins with “Library policy: For a book to be removed from circulation”. It is a Sufficient Assumption question. Learn how to master LSAT Sufficient questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.