LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

User avatar
 AspenHerman
  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: Apr 03, 2021
|
#88923
How is this a justify question?

I thought that, based off the introduction to assume the truth of the passage, that this question had to be in Family 1, but to be honest, I had no idea what it could be. Is this some weird round about way to ask "the conclusion above is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?"

Any advice would be welcome. Thanks!!

Aspen
 Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1003
  • Joined: Dec 06, 2013
|
#88967
Aspen,

Good question! We are trusting the passage for this one, so it looks like a Prove, but we're also trusting the answer choices ("if one also knows that"), so it looks like it might be anything. So consider the exact task. We trust the stimulus, and trust the correct answer, and that correct answer will be sufficient to prove the conclusion that's given in the question itself. Isn't that what a Justify does? Trust the original premises, add the correct answer, and the combination gives you sufficient information to prove the conclusion. Rewriting this question by putting the "conclusion" into the stimulus would have made it more clear that this was a Justify, but note that you're not drawing an inference from the stimulus, so you can see this isn't a Prove (or Disprove) family question. And the answer helps, so it must be Help. From there we just consider what we're helping - we're helping make an argument perfect. That's Justify.

Robert Carroll
User avatar
 AspenHerman
  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: Apr 03, 2021
|
#89049
Robert Carroll wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 11:38 am Aspen,

Good question! We are trusting the passage for this one, so it looks like a Prove, but we're also trusting the answer choices ("if one also knows that"), so it looks like it might be anything. So consider the exact task. We trust the stimulus, and trust the correct answer, and that correct answer will be sufficient to prove the conclusion that's given in the question itself. Isn't that what a Justify does? Trust the original premises, add the correct answer, and the combination gives you sufficient information to prove the conclusion. Rewriting this question by putting the "conclusion" into the stimulus would have made it more clear that this was a Justify, but note that you're not drawing an inference from the stimulus, so you can see this isn't a Prove (or Disprove) family question. And the answer helps, so it must be Help. From there we just consider what we're helping - we're helping make an argument perfect. That's Justify.

Robert Carroll
Thank you for that analysis!!! It's definitely a stimulus that you have to parse the words, and I bet that there were some wrong answers that would satisfy a prove family question. How evil!! :0

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.