December 2003 LSAT Section 4 Question 3
Teacher: Participating in organized competitive athletics may increase a child's strength and coordination. As criti...
Reply

Annie on March 21, 2020
Hi @gharibiannick,Here's a breakdown of the argument:
Premise: Organized athletics may increase a kid's strength/coordination.
Premise: Organized athletics can instill feelings of inferiority that never really disappear.
Premise: Adults who feel inferior have been shown to be more successful.
Conclusion: So, we should keep funding for kid's organized athletics.
Great job narrowing the choices down to A + C.
(C) is incorrect because the statement is not a hypothesis, but is rather another premise being used to support the argument. A hypothesis is something that must be tested. The statement that organized athletics increase strength/coordination is not being challenged or tested, but is simply being put forward as a fact. None of the following statements are used to support it either, rather it stands on its own and is used to support the final conclusion.
(A) is correct because, as you can see in the argument breakdown above, it is simply one premise being used to support the final conclusion. This question is a bit tricky because it seems like a random premise as the other two are centered around inferiority. However, just because the premise is about something a bit different, doesn't mean it is not still a premise supporting the ultimate conclusion- aka a reason for adopting the policy.