Pachai: The neighbor’s 1-year old child, has been crying all morning, disrupting my concentration. I have a Zoom meeting at noon with my supervisor so I can tell him about the new project I’m working on. Since the child will not stop crying, I should go and take the call at the quiet coffee shop down the street in order to be able to concentrate.
The claim that the neighbor’s 1- year old child will not stop crying figures in the argument in which of the following ways?
A. It is the main conclusion of the argument.
B. It is a premise used to support the main conclusion of the argument.
C. It provides background information that is irrelevant to the conclusion of the argument.
D. It is a subsidiary conclusion.
E. It is a conclusion for which support is provided and that itself is used in turn to directly support the argument’s main conclusion.
Answer
CORRECT ANSWER: B
EXPLANATION: The child will not stop crying is used as support for the main conclusion that Pachai should go take his call at the quiet coffee shop down the street.
EXPLANATION: The child will not stop crying is used as support for the main conclusion that Pachai should go take his call at the quiet coffee shop down the street.
Want to receive daily LSAT practice delivered right into your inbox? Sign up here for our LSAT Question of the Day emails!
Related Posts
Search the Blog
Free LSAT Practice Account
Sign up for a free Blueprint LSAT account and get access to a free trial of the Self-Paced Course and a free practice LSAT with a detailed score report, mind-blowing analytics, and explanatory videos.
Learn More
Popular Posts
-
-
logic games Game Over: LSAC Says Farewell to Logic Games -
-
General LSAT Advice How to Get a 180 on the LSAT -
Entertainment Revisiting Elle's LSAT Journey from Legally Blonde