LSAT 148 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q7

LR Question 7 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Peraski: Although driving gas-guzzling automobiles produces a…

QUESTION TYPE: Point at Issue

ARGUMENTS: Peraski says anyone who pollutes more than they need to shouldn’t speak out against greater pollution, for it would reveal hypocrisy.

Jackson says people should risk revealing their hypocrisy in order to speak out against greater pollution.

ANALYSIS: Peraski and Jackson disagree about whether it makes sense for hypocrites to speak out against greater harm.

They both agree about everything. Which is rare, usually the second person simply doesn’t give an opinion about some facts, but here they both seem to have a shared set of facts they accept.

___________

1. Peraski introduces this fact, and Jackson doesn’t disagree with it.
2. Peraski and Jackson both seem to agree that this would be hypocritical. The difference is that Jackson thinks it’s ok to be hypocritical in order to speak out against something wrong.
3. Both Peraski and Jackson seem to agree with this.
4. CORRECT. Peraski says hypocrites shouldn’t speak out and reveal their hypocrisy. Jackson says keeping silent is worse than revealing hypocrisy.
5. Both Peraski and Jackson disagree with this. They both think small cars are better than large cars, and bicycles are better than small cars.

Recap: The question begins with “Peraski: Although driving gas-guzzling automobiles produces a”. It is a Point at Issue question. To practice more Point at Issue questions, have a look at the LSAT Questions by Type page.