LSAT 117 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q8

LR Question 8 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Insurgent political parties that are profoundly …

QUESTION TYPE: Complete the Argument

ANALYSIS: The argument is basically saying that

Before victory: factions temporarily ignore disagreements.

After victory: those disagreements inevitably come back.

The most natural conclusion is that after an insurgent party wins, they can’t just keep pretending those disagreements don’t exist. Once the party wins, it has to deal with them.

Note that we don’t know what the consequences of those disagreements mean. It’s not saying the party will collapse or they can never come to an agreement. It only says the disagreements will come forward after victory.

Which means that the safest conclusion is that it has to deal with those disagreements to stay in power.

___________

1. No basis to conclude this. It never mentions how long the original party stayed in power and whether the insurgent party can match that.
2. CORRECT. This follows naturally. If disagreements inevitably come forward after victory, then the party must address them if it hopes to lead successfully and remain in power.
3. The argument is about internal factional disagreement, not whether the victorious party creates a new ideology.
4. The stimulus discusses conflict within the insurgent party, not opposition from the ousted party.
5. Way too strong. The stimulus says disagreements come forward after victory. It doesn’t say compromise is impossible.