February 1993 LSAT Section 4 Question 23

The workers at Bell Manufacturing will shortly go on strike unless the management increases their wages. As Bell's pr...

Ryn on March 13, 2022

confusion

I am a little confused this argument concludes a necessary condition. concluding a necessary condition does not guarantee a sufficient. To me, the safest answer would be that the boss "could increase wages or the strikes may not strike."

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on March 13, 2022

Hi @Ryn,

Since this is a strengthen with sufficient, we are looking for the answer choice that makes the argument valid- and completely fixes the flaw in its reasoning. The argument proceeds as follows:

Strike unless Increase
If increase, then sell subsidiaries.
Thus, sell subsidiaries.

We have two possible outcomes to the causal chain; either the workers will strike, or the company will increase wages, and thus be forced to sell subsidiaries.

This argument is flawed in that it concludes that the company will sell subsidiaries without considering the possibility of the other outcome mentioned above- a strike. If we are told that a strike will not occur, then we know that the company will raise wages, and that they will in turn be forced to sell a subsidiary. That is, if we are told there will not be a strike, then the author's conclusion is correct.