hard · LSAT
All top-tier law firms require their associates to work at least sixty hours per week. No firm that requires such long hours can maintain high levels of employee satisfaction. Therefore, if a law firm has high levels of employee satisfaction, it is not a top-tier firm.
Which of the following most accurately describes the pattern of reasoning in the argument?
- It connects three categories by taking the contrapositives of two conditionals and chaining them into a valid deduction.
- It treats a condition required for an outcome as though it were enough by itself to bring that outcome about.
- It overturns a broad generalization by appealing to a single case that runs counter to it.
- It infers that each individual within a group shares a trait simply because the group as a whole possesses it.
- It supports its conclusion by drawing an analogy between law firms and other competitive workplaces.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- The author's use of the word "demonstrates" most strongly suggests that the author's attit
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?