LSAT 3 – Section 2 – Question 25

LSAT 3 - Section 2 - Question 25

December 1991

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:13

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
PT3 S2 Q25
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
A
5%
156
B
18%
159
C
12%
157
D
9%
159
E
56%
166
151
161
170
 +Hardest 148.13 +SubsectionMedium
This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!

This is a flaw question, and we know that because of the question stem: Which one of the following indicates a weakness in the position expressed above?

The author says that the United States has been used and is okay with a large defense budget used to fight against the Eastern bloc. However, the author says that Ince the threat along with the Eastern bloc is disappearing, the author concludes that it’s doubtful whether the public can be persuaded to support an adequate defense budget.

This argument may seem acceptable on surface level, but it’s important to hone in on certain modifiers and adjectives in this stimulus (as is often the case on the LSAT). In the first sentence, the author says that the defense budget is substantial. In the second, he says it’s adequate. Do those two mean the same thing? Especially with the Eastern bloc now dissolving, how do we know that an adequate budget and a substantial budget don’t mean entirely different things? This is where the argument falls short.

Answer Choice (A) is not descriptively accurate; the public isn’t being manipulated according to the argument. Instead, the argument speaks to the public being convinced of something.

Answer Choice (B) is not descriptively accurate either; there isn’t really a causal relationship being established in the argument; if there is, it’s that the eastern bloc caused the public to accept the defense budget, but that’s not what is wrong with the argument.

Answer Choice (C) is not descriptively accurate; the argument doesn’t as fact what it’s seeking to establish. If it was, this argument would feel very circular.

Answer Choice (D) is descriptively inaccurate; they do give a reason, it’s just not a very supportive premise for the conclusion reached.

Correct Answer Choice (E) is descriptively accurate and it’s a flaw. The way “substantial” and “adequate” are used isn’t clear. They could be mean different amounts of money, and the public could support an adequate budget without agreeing with a substantial budget.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 3 Explanations

Section 1 - Logic Games

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply