LSAT 116 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q12

LR Question 12 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Some argue that because attaining governmental power in…

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption

CONCLUSION: The fact that political parties in democracies are unprincipled is a benefit, rather than a necessary evil.

REASONING: Shifting principles allows governments to more easily reflect public opinion; therefore shifting principles is good.

ANALYSIS: Regarding lack of principle, the stimulus lists a benefit but doesn’t address any potential disadvantages. We can’t say the conclusion is correct unless we know the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.

___________

1. It’s not clear why this matters. Even if policymakers could retain power by ignoring some or all of their coalition members, it doesn’t affect the argument that lack of principle is a benefit.
2. The comparison to non-democratic policymakers is irrelevant, as this issue does not depend on them.
3. CORRECT. This is a required assumption. If it’s false, then lack of principle outweighs any advantages gained from flexibility, and the argument falls apart. The argument says that lack of principle is a net benefit, and this lets us weigh the advantages and disadvantages.
4. Since the argument claims that lack of principle is a net benefit, it shouldn’t matter how often politicians appeal to principle.
5. As in B, the comparison to non-democratic governments is irrelevant. The conclusion deals with an issue internal to democratic systems.

Recap: The question begins with “Some argue that because attaining governmental power in”. It is a Necessary Assumption question. Learn more about LSAT Necessary questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.