Bunuel
Unless the building permit is obtained by February 1 of this year or some of the other activities necessary for construction of the new library can be completed in less time than originally planned, the new library will not be completed on schedule. It is now clear that the building permit cannot be obtained by February 1, so the new library will not be completed on schedule.
The conclusion drawn follows logically from the premises if which one of the following is assumed?
(A) All of the other activities necessary for construction of the library will take at least as much time as originally planned.
(B) The officials in charge of construction of the new library have admitted that it probably will not be completed on schedule.
(C) The application for a building permit was submitted on January 2 of this year, and processing building permits always takes at least two months.
(D) The application for a building permit was rejected the first time it was submitted, and it had to be resubmitted with a revised building plan.
(E) It is not possible to convince authorities to allow construction of the library to begin before the building permit is obtained.
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
Nonsensical logic here. It’s like saying, “Unless I get into Harvard or Yale, I won’t be able to make a lot of money. But I know I’m not going to get into Harvard, so I know I’m not going to make a lot of money.” The obvious objection is, “What happened to Yale?”
The same objection applies to this argument. “What happened to completing some of the other activities necessary for construction in less time than originally planned? Why the hell would you bring that up, only to ignore it?”
We’re asked to make the conclusion “follow logically,” which in this case means we have to eliminate the alternative routes. The correct answer will be in the form of “you’re not getting into Yale.” I think “we know we can’t complete any of the other activities necessary for construction ahead of the original schedule” is what we’re looking for.
A) Well, this nicely matches our prediction. So it’s probably the answer.
B) The opinion of the officials isn’t relevant here. The only things that are relevant are the facts and logic that have been presented. If it’s a fact that the only ways to complete the building on schedule are to get the permit before February 1 or finish some of the other activities early, then we can
prove that we can’t finish construction on schedule if we know we are not going to get the permit before February 1
and we also know, as answer A says, that we’re not going to finish the other activities early. A would
prove our case. I suppose B would strengthen our case somewhat, but A would strengthen our case beyond a shadow of a doubt.
C) This does nothing, because we already know we’re not going to get the permit on time.
D) Again, we already know we are not going to get the permit on time. So this is irrelevant.
E) ***** shut up about the permit already!
A is the only answer that closes off our alternate route to on-time completion. If A is true, then we are not going to finish on time. That’s the conclusion we were
trying to justify, so A is our answer.