LSAT 37, Logical Reasoning II, Q12, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Pundit: People complain about how ineffectual their…

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption/Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: When people complain about representatives, we can know that the politicians are just doing what they were elected to do.

REASONING: People make the specific complaint that politicians are ineffectual. Politicians only seem that way because they must make compromises to secure government funds.

ANALYSIS: This is a very subtle question. The conclusion talks about complaints in general. But the evidence only comes from complaints about ineffectuality. 

We have no idea what people are like when they make general political complaints.

___________

1. CORRECT. The stimulus’ evidence is about what is true when people complain that their politicians are ineffectual. But then the conclusion talks about what is true when people complain about their politicians in general. 
2. The argument didn’t talk about increasing government resources. It talked about securing (existing) government funds.
3. The argument was simply clarifying why politicians behaved the way they do. It doesn’t matter whether the public would be satisfied with such an explanation. 
4. This isn’t necessary. If compromise only disappointed the public 95% of the time, would the argument be weakened?
5. This is silly. The argument isn’t claiming that nobody else displeases the public. 

LawHub Order

LawHub Order

---