medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Of the three surviving maps, exactly two contain scale bars. Map K does not contain one. Therefore, each of the other two maps contains a scale bar.
Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its pattern of reasoning to the argument above?
- Exactly two of three contracts were signed. J was not signed. Therefore both other contracts were signed.
- At least three of four contracts were signed. J was not signed. Therefore all other contracts were signed.
- Exactly two of four bids were accepted. Bid A was rejected. Therefore all three remaining bids were accepted.
- Exactly two of three contracts were signed. J was signed. Therefore neither other contract was signed.
- Exactly three of five contracts were signed. Contract J was not signed. Therefore all four other contracts were signed.
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?