Free LSAT Practice Question

Question 1 of 1
ID: LSAT-LR-191
Section: Logical Reasoning
Topic: Weaken the Argument
Difficulty level: Medium

Practice Mode: Single selected Question » Back to Overview

Waller: The trust had the top field's walls rebuilt in two lots. The lot we took has a through-stone every metre and has stood ten winters. The lot the earlier contractor took has none, and it began to bulge in its third. Each lot was rebuilt from the stone already lying in it. So the through-stones are what have held our lot up.

Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the waller's argument?

AThe lot that has through-stones was rebuilt in two stages, and the wall done later has been up little more than half as long as the first.

BThe lot with no through-stone had come down twice before, and its stone was left too small by those falls to bind.

CPushing a bulged wall straight and pinning it takes two men a day, and a wall rebuilt with through-stones comes down to its foundation to be reset.

DWhich lengths have bulged is known from two tenants, and neither walks the far end of either lot.

EBulging is the commonest fault in the district's rebuilt walls, and a bulged wall keeps its line a long time before any of its stone comes down.

» Quit