hard · LSAT Logical Reasoning
No public official should accept gifts from any party whose interests the official's decisions can affect. A city zoning commissioner accepted expensive event tickets from a developer with several applications pending before her commission. The commissioner has therefore acted improperly and ought to resign.
The statement that no public official should accept gifts from a party whose interests the official's decisions can affect plays which one of the following roles in the argument?
- It is in fact a concession the argument makes to an opposing view.
- It is a definition of improper conduct inferred from the conclusion that the commissioner should resign.
- It is a factual report of one official's particular behavior.
- It is a general principle that, applied to the stated facts, yields the argument's conclusion.
- It is the conclusion drawn from the commissioner's conduct.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement…
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
- No one who is tired can concentrate. Peter is not tired… Which of the following correctly…
All Logical Reasoning questions · LSAT study guide · LSAT glossary · LSAT flashcards