Unplugged Practice Test: Logical Reasoning Set 1, Question 12 (Main Conclusion)
Taking the test? Finish it first. This page shows the answer.
- Main Conclusion questions ask for the single claim the rest of the argument is there to support.
- Ask which claim the other sentences back up. The conclusion often sits in the middle, and the last sentence is often just evidence.
- Every question on this test is original, written to the same logical skeletons as real questions, and Steve checked every one himself before release.
The question
Restaurant chains generally forbid their line cooks to alter the recipes handed down from the corporate kitchen, since the point of a chain menu is that a dish tastes the same at every location rather than different in each cook's hands. Even so, cooks ought to be allowed to depart from those recipes. Rigid standardization degrades the food by leaving cooks unable to correct for the variation in the ingredients that arrive each week.
12. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the overall conclusion drawn in the argument?
- (A)Line cooks at chain restaurants ought to be permitted to depart from the recipes they are given.
- (B)Rules forbidding cooks to alter recipes are widespread among restaurant chains.
- (C)The point of a chain menu is that a dish tastes the same at every location rather than different in each cook's hands.
- (D)Strictly standardized recipes make the food served at chain restaurants worse.
- (E)Cooks who must follow a recipe exactly cannot correct for the variation in the ingredients they receive.
AWhy (A) is correct
The stimulus opens with background: chains bar cooks from changing recipes so a dish tastes the same everywhere. Then comes 'even so,' which flags the author's real stand: cooks ought to be allowed to depart from those recipes. Everything after that, that rigid standardization degrades the food and leaves cooks unable to correct for ingredient variation, backs up that stand instead of standing on its own.
Why the other answers are wrong
BWhy (B) is wrong
(B) states that the no-altering rule is common among chains. That's the setup, not the point being argued.
CWhy (C) is wrong
(C) restates why chains want uniform recipes, the reasoning the author pushes past with 'even so,' not the conclusion.
DWhy (D) is wrong
(D) gives the reason standardization is bad, a premise for allowing departures, not the conclusion itself.
EWhy (E) is wrong
(E) explains why standardization fails, which backs
Common questions
What type of question is this?
Main Conclusion. Main Conclusion questions ask for the single claim the rest of the argument is there to support.
How do I get better at Main Conclusion questions?
Ask which claim the other sentences back up. The conclusion often sits in the middle, and the last sentence is often just evidence. The free LSAT cheat sheet lists the wrong-answer patterns to watch for on every type.
