LSAT 150 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q4

LR Question 4 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: When politicians describe their opponents’ positions, they typically…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Politicians could persuade more voters if they were charitable in describing their opponents arguments.

REASONING: When academic scholars describe their opponents’ positions charitably, these scholars get more respect. Politicians don’t do this – they try and make their opponents look as stupid as possible.

ANALYSIS: The author makes a major mistake: they forget that politicians and scholars speak to different audiences. Scholars are trying to persuade other scholars – they may appreciate seeing scholarly arguments interpreted charitably.

Politicians, on the other hand, are trying to persuade the general public. The general public may prefer to think their opponents have stupid proposals.

___________

1. CORRECT. Exactly. The author utterly fails to consider that politicians are trying to persuade a different audience than scholars are.
2. The author didn’t say politicians should be more charitable or must be more charitable. They just said politicians could persuade more voters.
    
   So, maybe it’s hard to be charitable, but also rewarding.
3. This is a trap answer. It’s intended to catch you if you were vaguely thinking “audience” as a prephrase.
    
   This answer is describing a completely different situation.
    
   Example of flaw: The author notes that comedies are funny, and tragedies are sad, and they talk about these differences at great length. But, the author ignores that theatre audiences may like both comedies and tragedies.
4. The author didn’t actually do this. Presumably, politicians may have many aims. The author was only saying that they could persuade more people by being charitable. So, if politicians do want to persuade, then here is a tool they can use to do that. Saying how you can achieve a goal doesn’t mean that’s your main goal!
    
   e.g. If I give you advice about reading faster, that doesn’t mean I think reading faster is your ultimate goal in life.
5. The author didn’t say that! They just said politicians typically make opponents positions seem implausible. Typically doesn’t mean “all”. So presumably if a politicians shares an opponent’s position on an issue they won’t ridicule that issue.

Recap: The question begins with “When politicians describe their opponents’ positions, they typically”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Flaw questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.