Unplugged Practice Test: Logical Reasoning Set 1, Question 11 (Weaken)
Taking the test? Finish it first. This page shows the answer.
- Weaken questions ask which new fact most undermines the argument.
- Find the gap the argument leaves open, then look for the choice that widens it.
- 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
Outreach coordinator: Comets bright enough to view through a small telescope come within range of our region fairly often, but they are usually detected too late for a club to plan around them. Wider automated sky surveys should give weeks of advance notice, so Calder's astronomy club should be able to feature such a comet at its public nights far more often over the next few decades. A featured comet always leaves the club with several months of unusually heavy total turnout at those nights. Clubs sign up dues-paying members when turnout holds at a high level for weeks on end, so Calder's club should be signing up dues-paying members more often in the decades ahead.
11. Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the outreach coordinator's argument?
- (A)In Calder, the months of unusually heavy total turnout have rarely included stretches in which turnout held at a high level for weeks on end.
- (B)In Calder, turnout at the club's public nights runs much lower on weeknights than it does on weekends.
- (C)Calder's astronomy club regularly loses dues-paying members during long stretches in which turnout is low.
- (D)In many towns whose clubs feature comets at public nights far more often than Calder's club does, dues-paying club membership is much rarer than it is in Calder.
- (E)Automated sky surveys yield findings besides comet detections, and a few of those findings might bear on club membership.
AWhy (A) is correct
The coordinator chains 3 things: more comet warning means more featured comets, a featured comet always brings months of unusually heavy turnout, and dues-paying members sign up when turnout holds high for weeks on end. The problem sits between the second and third link. Months of heavy total turnout aren't the same as turnout staying high week after week without a dip, and the argument needs that second, stricter pattern. (A) hits it directly: if Calder's heavy-turnout months have rarely held at a high level for stretches of weeks, then more featured comets won't reliably produce the weeks-long streak that turns turnout into new dues-paying members.
Why the other answers are wrong
BWhy (B) is wrong
(B) just splits turnout by weeknight versus weekend, which says nothing about whether high turnout holds for weeks straight.
CWhy (C) is wrong
(C) describes losing members during slow stretches, which is compatible with the argument and doesn't touch the comet-to-signup chain.
DWhy (D) is wrong
(D) compares Calder to other towns' membership rates, a side-by-side that doesn't say what happens inside Calder as comet sightings rise.
EWhy (E) is wrong
(E) is vague about unnamed extra findings from the surveys and cuts no clear direction against the argument.
Common questions
What type of question is this?
Weaken. Weaken questions ask which new fact most undermines the argument.
How do I get better at Weaken questions?
Find the gap the argument leaves open, then look for the choice that widens it. The free LSAT cheat sheet lists the wrong-answer patterns to watch for on every type.
