LSAT 16 – Section 3 – Question 25

LSAT 16 - Section 3 - Question 25

September 1995

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:04

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question QuickView	Type	Tags	Answer Choices	Curve	Question Difficulty	Psg/Game/S Difficulty	Explanation
PT16 S3 Q25	+LR	Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method	A 13% 160 B 3% 157 C 74% 169 D 5% 163 E 5% 160	148 157 166	+Harder	147.952 +SubsectionMedium

Here we have a Method of Reasoning question, which we know from the question stem: “The argument uses which of the following argumentative techniques?”

After correctly identifying the question type we can use structural analysis to describe the Method of Reasoning used by our speaker.

The stimulus begins with the author’s conclusion; the government has no right to tax earnings from labor. This conclusion follows with the reasoning of the argument. Taxes would require the employee to work for another’s purpose (the government) and it therefore meets one of the qualifications of indentured servitude. This connects back to our overall conclusion because the speaker uses the connection between taxes and indentured servitude to justify a moratorium on taxing labor.

By using indentured servitude as the reasoning for the main point our author is already making an assumption. If this type of work brings us to a conclusion about taxes, our argument assumes that these are two very comparable things. But we don’t know they share every quality – only that both taxing and indentured servitude are both working for another’s purpose. Perhaps taxation includes some sort of greater benefit that would make it ideal despite technically working for “another’s purpose.”

Knowing our correct answer choice will point out our author uses one quality to relate the entirety of two different things, we can jump into answer choice elimination.

Answer Choice (A) This answer choice starts out strong by telling us the stimulus outlines a general principle. But our stimulus does not justify that principle on the basis of a governmental obligation as claimed by this answer choice. For that reason we can take this one out of the running.

Answer Choice (B) By saying that the stimulus infers what will happen on the basis of what happened previously, this answer choice accuses our speaker of using the past as evidence for the future. But instead, our speaker uses a similarity between two ideas to support the conclusion.

Correct Answer Choice (C) This is exactly what we are looking for! This correct answer choice aligns well with our prediction by saying that the author compares two institutions who could have one very contrasting quality.

Answer Choice (D) Citing the authority of a theory means this answer accuses our speaker of using some well respected or renown information to support the conclusion. We can eliminate this answer choice because we know what the author uses as evidence: a comparison, rather than a respected figure.

Answer Choice (E) This answer choice accuses our speaker of presupposing an inevitability - something that is absolutely going to occur. But our stimulus does not get that far. While the speaker asserts that the government has no right to collect labor taxes, we do not know whether the lack of collection will be inevitable.

LSAT 16 – Section 3 – Question 25

LSAT 16 - Section 3 - Question 25

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 16 Explanations

Section 1 - Logic Games

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel