Crowdsourcing the June 2013 LSAT: June 2013 LSAT Explanation Central | About this project Graeme Blake is an LSAT instructor in Montreal. He scored a 177 on the June 2007 LSAT, and has taught for Testmasters and Ivy Global.
The former VP of Curriculum Development at 7Sage LSAT, he's the moderator of Reddit's LSAT forum, and the author of the Hacking The LSAT book series, which offers explanations for LSAT preptests.
This explanation is an excerpt from Graeme's upcoming book of explanations for LSAT 69, which will be available on amazon in the next few days. Graeme thinks LSAT Prep should be a lot less expensive than it is, and thinks that Nathan's project is a great idea.
Guest Blogger: Graeme Blake
QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption
CONCLUSION: Skiff will be promoted if his book is as important and well written as he claims.
REASONING: If Skiff releases his book this year, Nguyen will recommend promoting him, and the dean will listen.
ANALYSIS: Who cares if Skiff's book is important and well written?
He has to release it this year to get Nguyen's recommendation.
On sufficient assumption questions, you must connect the evidence to the conclusion. We get:
Important OR well written âžž published this year
That will let Skiff get Nyugen's recommendation. So, for those who like diagrams:
Important OR well written âžž published this year âžž Recommendation âžž Promotion
Three of the wrong answers add necessary conditions for Skiff to get promoted. Necessary conditions can never help you prove something will happen. They can only prove that something won't happen, when the necessary condition is missing.
A. CORRECT. See the explanation above. B. This doesn't tell us Skiff will publish in time to get Nguyen's recommendation. It just adds another useless necessary condition Skiff needs to fulfill before getting promoted. C. It doesn't matter whether Nguyen thinks the book is well written. We only know Nguyen will recommend Skiff once he publishes. We need to know that Skiff will publish this year. D. Same as B. This adds an additional necessary condition. That doesn't help us prove that the book will be published this year. E. Same as B and D. This adds a necessary condition. That makes it harder for Skiff to get promoted.
Please ask questions and/or suggest corrections to anything that seems confusing... we want to make this the best resource we can for LSAT students. We'll have all the June 2013 explanations up as quickly as possible. Thanks for reading. Tell your friends! --nathan