LSAT Explanation PT 36, S3, Q5: Solicitor: Loux named Zembaty executor of

LSAT Question Stem

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

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Weaken question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is E. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first break down the argument in the passage. The solicitor is arguing that Loux, who named Zembaty executor of her will, would not have objected to Zembaty selling the Stoke Farm to clear the estate's debts. The premises supporting this conclusion are as follows:

1. Loux's only beneficiary was her grandson, whom she loved very much.

2. Zembaty was legally required to choose which properties to sell to clear the estate's debts.

3. Loux never expressed any particular desire about the Stoke Farm.

The question type is Weaken, which means we need to find an answer choice that weakens the solicitor's argument that Loux would not have objected to Zembaty selling the Stoke Farm.

Now, let's discuss each answer choice:

a) The estate's debts could not have been cleared without selling the Stoke Farm.

- This answer choice actually strengthens the argument, as it suggests that selling the Stoke Farm was necessary to clear the debts. It does not provide any reason for Loux to object to the sale.

b) Loux repeatedly told her grandson that she would take care of him in her will.

- This answer choice is irrelevant to the issue of whether Loux would have objected to the sale of the Stoke Farm. It only tells us that Loux intended to provide for her grandson, but it doesn't give any specific information about the farm.

c) Loux was well aware of the legal requirements the executor of her will would have to satisfy.

- This answer choice is also irrelevant to the issue of whether Loux would have objected to the sale of the Stoke Farm. It only tells us that Loux was aware of the legal requirements, but it doesn't give any specific information about the farm.

d) The Stoke Farm was the main cause of the estate's debts.

- This answer choice, like (a), strengthens the argument by suggesting that it would make sense for Zembaty to sell the farm to clear the debts. It doesn't provide any reason for Loux to object to the sale.

e) Loux's grandson had repeatedly expressed his desire to own a farm.

- This is the correct answer. It weakens the argument by providing a reason why Loux might have objected to the sale of the Stoke Farm. If Loux knew about her grandson's desire to own a farm, she might have wanted the farm to be transferred to him instead of being sold to clear the debts.

In summary, answer choice (e) weakens the solicitor's argument by providing a reason why Loux might have objected to the sale of the Stoke Farm. The other answer choices either strengthen the argument or are irrelevant to the issue of whether Loux would have objected.