LR question - People complaining about their representatives

ComatoseClown
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 7:00 pm

LR question - People complaining about their representatives

Postby ComatoseClown » Fri Jul 29, 2011 10:30 pm

PT 37 S4 Q12

Can't see why the answer is A -- "...is the ONLY source of popular dissatisfaction" - isn't that extrapolating too much? (I chose D)

If this stimulus can be diagrammed, can you diagram it? Or explain how to arrive at answer choice A.

Thanks in advance.

User avatar
lrslayer
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:38 am

Re: LR question - People complaining about their representatives

Postby lrslayer » Fri Jul 29, 2011 10:46 pm

There are two statements in the prompt about people complaining:
1) about "how ineffectual their reps are"
2) general expression of dissatisfaction with their reps

1 is justified as a "manifestation of compromise..."
This "compromise" is in order to "do what they were elected to do"

2 attempts to apply this same justification to the general dissatisfaction with reps.
In actuality people in the second instance that are generally dissatisfied may be complaining about their reps being paid too much, or getting involved in twitter sexting scandels.

The only way one could apply the justification in the first statement to the second more general statement is if in fact the only thing people complained about was the reps being ineffectual. This is not the case but the author takes this for granted in order to validate his claim.

Therefore, as stated in answer A, he takes for granted that the only dissatisfaction people express is for ineffectuality.

User avatar
lrslayer
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:38 am

Re: LR question - People complaining about their representatives

Postby lrslayer » Fri Jul 29, 2011 10:52 pm

Remember when doing this kind of question (flawed b/c author takes what for granted) you must ask yourself what does the author need to assume or inject to make his claim valid. The correct answer will be one that validates the claim and fills the gap in the argument. I hope that makes sense. Apply that to answer D for example. We know that there is something fishy in the prompt. Does applying D fix the apparent discrepancy in the argument? No, it does not. Apply A however, and the whole things comes together and if A were in fact true this argument would be valid. Hope these two explanations help!




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ThatOneAfrican, Yahoo [Bot] and 13 guests