PrepTest 131, Section 2, Question 19
At a gathering at which bankers, athletes, and(16 more words not shown)
If the statements above are(11 more words not shown)
- AAll of the(3 more words not shown)
- BSome of the(4 more words not shown)
- CSome of the(4 more words not shown)
- DAll of the(3 more words not shown)
- ENone of the(3 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
We have bankers, athletes, and lawyers at this gathering. That doesn't rule out other people, such as doctors, but the relationships we're given concern these three groups.
Every banker is an athlete. Picture the bankers inside the athlete group. The athlete group might include other people too; we aren't told that only bankers are athletes. The lawyers must be separate from the bankers, but where do they sit relative to the rest of the athletes? They could all be athletes, none could be athletes, or some could be athletes and some not.
What we’re looking for
For what must be true, use the connection that is fixed rather than guessing where the flexible group goes. There are bankers here, and those bankers are both athletes and not lawyers. That guarantees athletes who aren't lawyers, regardless of where the other attendees fit.
Working the answers
- A
All bankers being athletes doesn't make all athletes bankers. The gathering could include an athlete who works in some other profession. Nothing rules that out, so A need not be true.
- B
Every lawyer could also be an athlete while none is a banker. That arrangement would obey both rules and make B false. The passage doesn't require any lawyers to fall outside the athlete group.
- CCorrect
Take one of the bankers who is present. That person is an athlete because all the bankers are athletes, and isn't a lawyer because no lawyers are bankers. The bankers therefore supply the required examples of athletes who are not lawyers.
- D
This directly contradicts the separation between bankers and lawyers. The bankers present cannot also be lawyers. Their being athletes doesn't cause the exclusion; the explicit no-lawyer-is-a-banker rule does.
- E
Lawyers could be athletes without being bankers. The rule separates lawyers from bankers, not from every member of the larger athlete group. Since lawyer-athlete overlap is possible, E isn't guaranteed.
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.