WeakenDiff: Easy

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Cassie wants to give agents fewer clients to improve service. Melvin says this is impossible because they can't find new agents to hire, and you'd need more agents to cover the work.

Conclusion: Reducing client loads at the real estate agency is not a feasible way to improve customer service.

Reasoning: Reducing client loads would require hiring more agents, but the agency is already struggling to find enough qualified agents to hire.

Analysis: Melvin's argument is based on the assumption that the only way to reduce the number of clients per agent is to increase the number of agents. To weaken this, Cassie needs to point out that there are other ways to achieve a lower client load. For example, the agency could simply stop accepting new clients, thereby reducing the total workload without needing new staff. Look for an answer that suggests the agency has options other than hiring more people to achieve Cassie's goal.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

4.

Of the following, which one, if true, is the logically strongest counter that Cassie can make to Melvin's argument?

Correct Answer
A
If reducing client loads would improve working conditions and thereby help recruit additional qualified agents, then Melvin’s claim that recruiting more agents is ‘out of the question’ is undermined, weakening his feasibility objection.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep