LSAT 103 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q4

LR Question 4 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Politician P: My opponent claims that the government is obligated…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: P thinks his opponent is wrong to say we are obliged to raise taxes to pay for valuable things.

REASONING: Taxpayers will get upset that they have less money.

ANALYSIS: P’s argument ignores the issue. His opponent says we have to raise taxes. That might be true, perhaps the law requires a certain level of funding.

P ignores this issue, and talks about some bad things that will happen if we raise taxes.

Taxes will surely have some negative effects, but P needs to show there is no obligation.

For those who like analogies: suppose I say that we have to walk 10 miles across the desert to reach safety. P says that would be uncomfortable, therefore there’s no need to walk across all that hot sand.

___________

1. Complete this sentence. P says: “My opponent also has the following unpopular view ______.”
2. Complete this sentence. P says: “My opponent is an _______,”
3. CORRECT. P’s misses his opponent’s point. His opponent said we had to raise taxes, not that we should. P needs to argue we don’t have to raise taxes.
4. The burdens of taxes aren’t a completely irrelevant issue. They’re just not the main point.
5. This would be a criticism of P’s opponent. We’re not told why we must raise taxes.

Recap: The question begins with “Politician P: My opponent claims that the government is obligated”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Flaw questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.