QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Strengthen
CONCLUSION: The country is not a well-functioning democracy.
REASONING: Most people want the bill, but influential people oppose it. The bill won’t violate human rights.
ANALYSIS: Principle questions are sometimes like sufficient assumption questions. The stimulus will give you a bunch of facts, then give a moral judgment. You need to show that those facts justify the moral judgment. So we need an answer that says one of the following:
Well functioning ➞ pass into law if benefits and no violations within a few years
NOT pass into law if benefits and no violations within a few years ➞ NOT well functioning
Be very precise. Two wrong answers sound good, but have the wrong timeline.
- This is almost right. But the stimulus said most people favored the bill. This answer talks about bills that benefit most people. Those are different things.
- This sounds good, but look at the timeline. The stimulus complained that the bill wouldn’t be passed into law for a few years, but it might be passed eventually. So the situation might not violate the criterion in this answer choice.
- This answer supports the idea that we are in a well functioning democracy. It says that it’s normal for such a democracy not to pass useful bills if influential people oppose them.
- This describes bills that are passed. The question was about a bill that is not going to be passed.
- CORRECT. This answer fits the facts. It says that in a well functioning democracy, beneficial bills will be promptly passed into law. In the stimulus, the beneficial bill wouldn’t be passed for a few years, if at all.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly