Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: If the jury was still working, the news trucks would be outside; since the trucks are gone, the jury must be finished.

Conclusion: The jury must have reached a verdict.

Reasoning: If a verdict had not been reached, media trucks would be present; however, there are no media trucks present.

Analysis: This argument follows a valid logical structure known as Modus Tollens: If P, then Q; Not Q, therefore Not P. The first sentence sets up a conditional relationship where 'no verdict' (P) requires 'media trucks' (Q). The second sentence observes the absence of the necessary condition (Not Q), leading to the negation of the sufficient condition (Not P). To find the parallel, look for an answer that follows this exact 'If A then B; Not B, so Not A' pattern without any logical errors.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

19.

The pattern of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following arguments?

Correct Answer
B
B matches the pattern exactly: If Peter did not buy a house, he would have rented an apartment (~House → Apartment). He did not rent an apartment (~Apartment). Therefore, he must have bought a house (House). That’s contrapositive reasoning.
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