medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
No one who is tired can concentrate. Peter is not tired. Therefore, Peter can concentrate.
Which of the following correctly evaluates this reasoning?
- Invalid, because it affirms the consequent rather than reasoning forward from the stated trigger.
- Valid by modus ponens, since the stated trigger is met and its proper consequence then follows.
- Invalid, because it negates the triggering condition and infers the absence of the stated barrier.
- Valid by modus tollens, since denying the consequent here properly yields the negated antecedent.
- Invalid, since no claim at all about a person's tiredness can ever bear on their concentration here.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- 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?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- 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