LSAT 31, Logical Reasoning I, Q7, LSATHacks

LR Question 7 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Social critic: The whole debate over the legal right of…

QUESTION TYPE: Most Strongly Supported

CONCLUSION: The debate over the legal right of rock singers to utter violent lyrics misses the point.

REASONING: Not everything that legally can be said ought to be said. Violence does predate the use of violent words. But words also have the power to change how we see and act. 

ANALYSIS: This is pretty straightforward. The critic doesn’t think rock musicians should be legally forced to sing less violent lyrics. But they worry that the lyrics can contribute to violence: words can change how we act. 

___________

1. The critic hasn’t said what should be illegal.
2. Same as A. The critic has conceded that the law is clear and they haven’t called for the law to be changed.
3. The critic suggests that rock music can incite violence: words have the power to change how we act.
4. CORRECT. Words have the power to change how we act. So if rock music were less violent (voluntarily) then maybe people would be less violent too. 
5. This goes too far. The critic doesn’t say how much violence is caused by rock music. 

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.