PrepTest 112, Section 1, Question 14
If Slater wins the election, McGuinness will be(38 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- AIf the polls(16 more words not shown)
- BMcGuinness will be(21 more words not shown)
- CEither Slater will(13 more words not shown)
- DMcGuinness is not(15 more words not shown)
- EIf the polls(24 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Being more qualified doesn't guarantee Yerxes the job. We are told who will be appointed if Slater wins, not that the position goes to whoever has the stronger qualifications.
There is also a limit on what the first sentence tells us. A Slater victory guarantees McGuinness the appointment, but it may not be the only way McGuinness gets it. Another candidate might choose McGuinness too. Keep that possibility open rather than inventing a rule for an election result we haven't been told about.
What we’re looking for
Now connect the poll information. If the polls give a good indication of the result, Slater will win; that gets McGuinness appointed; and McGuinness is less qualified than Yerxes. For this inference question, I'd expect an answer saying that accurate polls lead to the less qualified of these two people getting the job. We must keep the condition about the polls. The passage doesn't guarantee their accuracy, and it doesn't tell us that Yerxes is the best of every possible candidate.
Working the answers
- A
Inaccurate polls don't tell us who gets appointed. Even if Slater loses, another winner could appoint McGuinness or someone less qualified still. We have no rule giving Yerxes the job or guaranteeing a better choice whenever the polls are wrong.
- B
This turns one route to the appointment into the only permitted route. Reliable polls lead us to Slater's victory and then McGuinness's appointment. But perhaps a different winner would appoint McGuinness too, or perhaps the polls could be unreliable while Slater still wins. The appointment doesn't require the polls to be a good guide.
- C
Neither outcome is guaranteed. The polls could be wrong, another candidate could win, and that person could choose someone other than Yerxes. Nothing in the passage forces at least one of C's two possibilities to happen.
- D
Yerxes's qualifications are given as a reason she is more qualified. That doesn't establish that McGuinness lacks each of those credentials. McGuinness might also be an architect, for example, while having less experience or being less qualified for another reason. A comparison of overall qualifications doesn't tell us that both specific statements in D are true.
- ECorrect
Follow the entire chain. If the polls are a good indication of the election result, Slater wins. If Slater wins, McGuinness becomes head of the planning commission. Yerxes is more qualified than McGuinness, so that appointment puts someone less qualified than Yerxes in charge.
E keeps the starting condition instead of claiming this outcome happens no matter what. It also uses the comparison we actually have: less qualified than Yerxes, not less qualified than every other candidate.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.