LSAT Explanation PT 34, S2, Q23: To be horrific, a monster must

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following logically follows from the statements above? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Must Be True question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is E. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Question Type: Inference (Must Be True)

Let's first analyze the passage and break it down into simpler terms. The passage states that:

1. To be horrific, a monster must be threatening (Horrific -> Threatening)

2. If a monster is physically dangerous, then it is threatening (Physically Dangerous -> Threatening)

3. A physically benign monster is horrific if it inspires revulsion (Inspires Revulsion -> Horrific)

Now, let's look at the answer choices and see which one logically follows from the statements above:

a) Any horror-story monster that is threatening is also horrific.

This answer choice is an illegal reversal of statement 1. The passage states that to be horrific, a monster must be threatening, but it doesn't say that every threatening monster is horrific. So, this answer choice is incorrect.

b) A monster that is psychologically dangerous, but that does not inspire revulsion, is not horrific.

This answer choice is an illegal negation of statement 3. The passage states that a physically benign monster is horrific if it inspires revulsion, but it doesn't say that a monster that doesn't inspire revulsion is not horrific. So, this answer choice is incorrect.

c) If a monster triggers infantile fears but is not physically dangerous, then it is not horrific.

This answer choice is an illegal chain. We cannot conclude that a monster isn't horrific just because it isn't physically dangerous. The passage doesn't provide enough information to reach this conclusion. So, this answer choice is incorrect.

d) If a monster is both horrific and psychologically threatening, then it does not inspire revulsion.

This answer choice is another illegal chain. Fulfilling the necessary conditions of being threatening and horrific doesn't negate the sufficient condition of inspiring revulsion. So, this answer choice is incorrect.

e) All monsters that are not physically dangerous, but that are psychologically dangerous and inspire revulsion, are threatening.

This answer choice is correct. If a monster inspires revulsion, we can conclude that it is both horrific and threatening, regardless of its physical danger status. This answer choice logically follows from the statements in the passage.

So, the correct answer is (e). The takeaway here is that diagramming the logic in the passage can help you eliminate irrelevant information and focus on the essential logical relationships between the statements. This will make it easier to answer Must Be True Inference questions on the LSAT.