QUESTION TEXT: Newscaster: In order for the public to participate in a meaningful…
QUESTION TYPE: Parallel Reasoning
CONCLUSION: The public might be able to participate in the current policy debate.
REASONING: Participation requires that the issue be framed in terms the public can understand. The mayor’s speech was framed in terms the public can understand.
ANALYSIS: The mayor’s speech fulfilled a necessary condition for public participation. They won’t necessarily participate, but it’s possible. The roadblock is gone.
___________
- This is a good argument, but it’s too good. We’re certain she can’t read Crime and Punishment, while the stimulus is not certain.
- Same as A; this is too certain.
- Unfortunately for Hugo, this answer choice does not tell us anything that would help us conclude he won’t confuse his students.
- A good dictionary was only a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition. This is a flawed argument; we can’t say if Pablo actually discovered the meaning of the words.
- CORRECT. If Jerome didn’t have warm clothing, he would fail. But since he does have warm clothing, he might succeed.
Recap: The question begins with “Newscaster: In order for the public to participate in a meaningful”. It is a Parallel Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Parallel questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.
Leave a Reply