19. We must find VanWilligan's assumption. The argument works this way:
P1: Unrestricted free market salaried set by what others are willing to pay |
|
P2: Athletes create huge profits for owners, and thus owners willing to pay extraordinary salaries. |
|
Assumption: If owners willing to pay, then salary is fair. |
|
| ___________________________________________________________ | |
| C: Salaries are fair. |
The new concept in the conclusion is "fair". How did VanWilligan get to "fair"? By assuming that if owners are willing to pay, then the salary is fair. Choice (D) provides this:
| Owner willing to pay g Salary fair |
You do not need to go beyond the second word in choice (A), which deals with a superlative -- "fairest". VanWilligan only discusses "fair".
At a quick glance, choice (B) seems a bit like the contrapositive of the third sentence. But, the third sentence does not state:
Profits High g Salaries High
|
If we look more closely at the third sentence we find that it states that owners are willing to pay the salaries, not necessarily that they actually do pay the salaries. Also, the question asks for an assumption, not an inference, so eliminate (B).
Choice (C) seems to weaken the argument by stating that owners are forced to pay the salaries, not willing. But, the question asks for an assumption, not to weaken the argument. From our analysis of the argument, we know that "salary is fair" is the necessary condition, not the sufficient condition.
(E) starts out with "salary is fair" as the sufficient condition, but we need a choice that contains "salary fair" as the necessary condition. So you may quit reading (E) after the comma and save time. (E) works this way:
Salary Fair g Determined by What Individual Willing to Pay |
Compare (E) with the assumption:
Owner Willing to Pay g Salary Fair |
20. The LSAT provides an inference support question.
Choice (A) states "recycled" but the Environmentalist states nothing of this; only of "discarded".
(B) is the correct choice because the first sentence states that appliances often contain heavy metals. Combine this with the final sentence and to determine that an incinerated appliance containing heavy metals will apparently result in those same heavy metals escaping into the air, and thus support appears for (B).
Although (C) might sound good, remember to never bring in outside information The key word in (C) is "atmosphere", but the Environmentalist only states "dangerous", but does not specify who or what is in danger.
(D) discusses "newer" appliances, yet the Environmentalist never discusses these and we are unable to compare with old appliances.
(E) goes against the second sentence. If landfills are operated properly, then there's no problem discarding appliances in landfills.
21. For this LSAT question, seek what must be false, i.e., which choice violates the information presented in the passage.
Choices (A), (C), (D), (E) all could be true. Remember that we do not need support for these choices (as we did for the correct choice in the previous question); rather, we simply need to determine whether the choices violate the information provided in the passage.
Choice (B) violates the passage information. (B) works this way:
Consume Substances that Postpone Muscle Fatigue g Problems Caused by Dehydration Made Worse |
This contradicts information in the first two sentences:
Consume Small Amount of Sugar (i.e., A Substance that Postpones Muscle Fatigue) g Helpful in Avoiding Dehydration |