LSAT Explanation PT 38, S4, Q1: Ms. Smith: I am upset that

LSAT Question Stem

If the principal is speaking sincerely, then it can be inferred from what the principal says that the principal believes that 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Must Be True question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's analyze the passage. Ms. Smith is upset that her son lost two days of recess because some children were throwing raisins in the cafeteria, even though her son was not involved. The principal responds by comparing the situation to a traffic jam caused by an accident, where innocent people still have to suffer the consequences even if they are not involved in the accident.

The question type is a Must Be True (MBT) question, which asks us to determine which statement can be inferred from the principal's response.

Now let's examine each answer choice:

a) many children were throwing raisins in the cafeteria

The principal doesn't mention the number of children involved in the raisin-throwing incident. It could have been just one child or several children, but we cannot make an inference about the number based on the principal's response. So, this choice is not supported.

b) Ms. Smith's son might not have thrown raisins in the cafeteria

This choice is supported by the principal's response. The principal compares the situation to being caught in a traffic jam caused by an accident, where people who are not involved still have to suffer the consequences. This implies that the principal believes that Ms. Smith's son might not have been involved in the raisin-throwing incident but still has to face the consequences. Thus, this is the correct answer.

c) after an accident the resulting traffic jams are generally caused by police activity

This choice is not supported, as the principal's response does not mention police activity or the cause of traffic jams. The comparison to a traffic jam is only used to illustrate the point that innocent people might still suffer the consequences of an incident they are not involved in.

d) Ms. Smith's son knows who it was that threw raisins in the cafeteria

The principal does not mention anything about Ms. Smith's son knowing who the culprits were. This choice is not supported by the principal's response.

e) losing two days of recess will deter future disruptions

The principal's response does not mention the purpose or effect of losing recess on future disruptions. Therefore, this choice is not supported.

In conclusion, the correct answer is B, as it is the only statement that can be inferred from the principal's response. The principal believes that Ms. Smith's son might not have thrown raisins in the cafeteria but still has to face the consequences, just like people caught in a traffic jam caused by an accident.