Why can't (E) be correct. S has concluded that being allows one to fight and vote. However, T is concluding that being 17 allows only one to fight and NOT vote.
The correct answer is (D). What exactly is the "truth of a claim on which S's conclusion is based?"
Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
2 posts • Page 1 of 1
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:14 pm
T in fact never concludes what you claim he concludes. He merely undermined the support that S offers for his argument, which is what "challenging the truth of a claim on which S's conclusion is based" means. S's conclusion is that 17-year-olds must be allowed to vote; his support is that (a) anyone who is old enough to fight should be old enough to vote, and (b) 17-year-olds can fight. T questions the truth of (a) by suggesting that fighting and voting are different in nature, and one should not necessarily follow another.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests