LSAT 64, Logical Reasoning I, Q3, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Political scientist: Efforts to create a more…

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: We can create a society that is both diverse and equal.

REASONING: We can support complementary interests. (E.g. we provide support for scientists and artists, in equal measure. Then we get scientific results that look beautiful. People are different, but they have equal support and opportunity.)

ANALYSIS: The political scientist first tells us his opponent’s argument: equality means we’d all be the same, and everything would be boring. Then the political scientist contradicts this. If we support complementary interests, we can be equal but different.

It may or may not be a good argument; a lot depends on how you define “equal”. But we’re concerned with the author’s method of argument: he launches a straightforward attack on his opponents’ claim.

___________

1. What undesirable consequence? This answer choice is a description of the political scientist’s opponents’ argument. They say that equality would lead to boring sameness. 
2. CORRECT. The political scientist says that his opponents assume that equality requires everyone to be the same. He contradicts them by saying we can be equal but different instead. 
3. The political scientist never says this. Maybe his opponents are very poor, and they would benefit from equality. 
4. This might be something that the author’s opponents say. “If the group is equal, then every person must be the same.”, they might say.
5. Which counterexample is being undermined? The author’s opponents never gave any examples for the author to weaken.

LawHub Order

LawHub Order

---