PrepTest 141, Section 2, Question 1
Editorial: The city has chosen a contractor to(41 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(10 more words not shown)
- ACertified technicians receive(5 more words not shown)
- BThere are no(10 more words not shown)
- CTechnicians who lack(5 more words not shown)
- DQualified technicians installed(6 more words not shown)
- EThe contractor hired(9 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Does not having this certificate mean you can't do the job?
The numbers are fine: if 40 percent of this contractor's technicians are certified, 60 percent aren't. But the editorial changes the description of that 60 percent from “uncertified” to “unqualified.” Those aren't automatically the same. A technician could know how to upgrade a heating system perfectly well without holding this particular association's certificate. Perhaps the certificate measures useful skills; perhaps it doesn't. We need that connection explained.
What we’re looking for
The question asks what the argument requires. To count all the uncertified technicians as unqualified, the editorial has to rule out qualified technicians who lack certification. Otherwise, its 60 percent figure for unqualified workers doesn't follow. We're looking for that missing link, not another reason to be angry with the city.
Working the answers
- A
How much the technicians earn doesn't tell us whether they can do the work. Certified technicians could earn more, less, or the same amount, and we'd still need to connect certification with qualification. The argument requires no pay comparison.
- B
Other contractors' certification rates don't establish the qualifications of this contractor's employees. Even if every other contractor had a lower rate, we could still ask whether these uncertified technicians are capable of doing the job. The argument doesn't need this contractor's 40 percent to be the lowest possible rate.
- CCorrect
This closes the gap: technicians without certification are not qualified. Now the 60 percent who lack certification can be counted as unqualified, as the editorial does. Notice the direction we need. We aren't trying to prove that every certified technician is excellent; we're trying to justify rejecting the uncertified technicians as unqualified.
- D
Who installed the existing systems is a separate issue from who is qualified to upgrade them now. Qualified people might have installed systems that eventually needed an upgrade. Unqualified people might have installed them instead. Neither possibility settles the present contractor's qualifications.
- E
Personal ties might make us suspicious of how the city chose the contractor, but the editorial's reasoning doesn't depend on those ties. The city could have picked the contractor through a completely impartial process, and the argument about uncertified technicians would remain exactly the same.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.