LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

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

  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: Oct 04, 2018
Thanks Robert! That was mighty helpful.
  • Posts: 85
  • Joined: May 21, 2019
This might be splitting hairs, but the premise is a "most" statement with "generally," but the conclusion is conditional. Thus, the argument's conclusion might not be properly drawn regardless, due to a weaker premise. Any thoughts of ways to get around that? Thanks!
User avatar
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 981
  • Joined: Jun 26, 2013
Hi blade21cn!

It's good to be paying careful attention to that language! And you are correct that the premise just states that being prudent generally causes people to resent you, not that it always causes resentment. In this case, though, answer choice (E) still enables the conclusion to be properly drawn.

Answer choice (E) doesn't say that it is imprudent to cause ALL people to resent you--just that it's imprudent to cause people to resent you. And if appearing prudent generally causes people to resent you, it doesn't have to cause all people to resent you all of the time--it's still generally causing people to resent you. Thus, if it's imprudent to cause people to resent you and appearing prudent causes people to resent you--even if it's not all people, all the time--then it is imprudent to appear prudent.

Hope this helps!


Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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