medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The clinic's encrypted patient archive was breached last week. Only three staff members hold the credentials required to open that archive, and each of them denies any involvement. Because the archive cannot be opened without those credentials, the breach must have been carried out by someone on the inside. The clinic should therefore replace its entire credentialing system.
The statement that the archive cannot be opened without those credentials plays which one of the following roles in the argument?
- It is background information that plays no part in the argument's reasoning.
- It is a premise that supports the credential-replacement recommendation directly, without contributing to any intervening conclusion.
- It is in fact the intermediate conclusion on which the argument's final recommendation directly rests.
- A premise supporting an intermediate conclusion, which in turn supports the argument's main conclusion.
- It is the main conclusion of the argument.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- 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 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?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?