PT 37 S4 (LR) Q12

User avatar
chraruce
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 4:40 pm

PT 37 S4 (LR) Q12

Postby chraruce » Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:51 am

Hello,

Could somebody please help me on this question? This is the only question that I got wrong on this section and I cannot see how it is *flawed* for the argument to take for granted that the "apparent ineffectuality of legislative representatives is the only source of popular dissatisfaction with those representatives".
I understand that the argument explicitly says that the complaint is related to this apparent ineffectuality; however, I do not see how this (the statement quoted above) is *flawed*.
Any insight will be helpful.
Thank you very much, in advance.

User avatar
chraruce
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 4:40 pm

Re: PT 37 S4 (LR) Q12

Postby chraruce » Sun Nov 14, 2010 9:01 am

Ok, now I understand this.
The conclusion states: "when people express dissatisfaction with their legislative representatives, we can be assured that these representatives are simply doing what they were elected to do". The problem is that people can express dissatisfaction for other reasons besides just ineffectuality. Therefore, this conclusion is flawed as the necessary condition (representatives are doing what they were elected to do) requires the sufficient condition (complaint about ineffectuality).
In other words, the sufficient condition is not necessarily a complaint per se, but a complaint about ineffectuality.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dontsaywhatyoumean and 3 guests