LSAT PrepTest 42 Section 2 Question 9 Explanation | Logical Reasoning

I didn't write the following blog post. It was already on the blog when I took over the URL. The following blog post may contain mistakes. -Steve

***

Here's a Logical Reasoning (Arguments) question from the December 2003 LSAT.

Let's make a quick chain of phrases so we can see the argument's progression. You won't have to do this on test day - instead you'll recognize key "trigger" words. I'm only doing this for instruction's sake:

Challenges = self-knowledge --> know how react --> understand weaknesses

We can't pre-phrase here because several choices could have this pattern. We'll just look for the pattern.

A) Correct. This choice fits the principle, and our pattern, above. The pianist's challenge is the memory lapse. He/she will react to this somehow (run off the stage, continue playing, etc.). The part about being better able to "better prepare for future performances" shows that he/she learned from that weakness. This perfectly fits the principle.

B) This choice is out of scope since it's about a successful experience, not a challenge or weakness. This principle is all about learning from weaknesses. Since there's no weakness here, just a successful sale, this choice doesn't address the principle.

C) Wrong for the same reason as B. There's no challenge, failing, or weakness to learn from.

D) Wrong for the same reason as B and C. One might learn from the positive experience of winning, but the principle we want is about learning from weaknesses and failings. This choice doesn't address that, so we can eliminate it.

E) Wrong. Again, out of scope. It says that someone who is afraid of public speaking will benefit from trying because it's "difficult for them." However, this may or may not result in failure/difficulty. We don't know the outcome, so we can't say if there's any sort of weakness/failure to learn from here.