LSAT 123 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q7

LR Question 7 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Antonio: One can live a life of moderation by never…

QUESTION TYPE: Point at Issue

ARGUMENTS: Antonio says a life of moderation means you will lose joy and spontaneity.

Marla says that a life of moderation requires you not to be moderate all the time. (And thus, someone living a life of moderation will have some joy and spontaneity.)

ANALYSIS: Antonio and Marla disagree over what a life of moderation requires. Antonio thinks it requires “all boring, all the time”. Marla thinks that a life of moderation requires someone to occasionally not be moderate.

Remember that on point at issue questions you’re looking for an answer where one person says “yes” and the other person says “no”.

___________

1. They both agree that one should occasionally take great chances. (This is what Marla means when she says someone who “never risks going too far” is failing to be moderate)
2. CORRECT. See the analysis above. Antonio thinks it requires bland lack of spontaneity. Marla thinks is requires occasionally taking risks and going too far (i.e. deviating from moderation).
3. Neither person talks about this. You could, for example, be moderate and well dressed. Neither person says anything that would contradict that claim. (Being well dressed isn’t exactly risky.)
4. Actually, neither person said what someone should do. They’re merely factually describing what is true.
    
   E.g. You might say “to be rich, you must work 80 hour weeks for at least a couple of years”. You’re not saying someone should do that. You’re just listing a requirement.
    
   So, maybe Antonio thinks that a life of bland moderation is nonetheless best, despite its sacrifices.
5. As with D, neither person says what is desirable. They’re only describing requirements and tradeoffs of moderation.
    
   But, reading between the lines, both people seem to imply approval of at least some spontaneity.