LSAT 120 – Section 3 – Question 04

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:18

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
PT120 S3 Q04
+LR
Weaken +Weak
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
7%
158
B
86%
164
C
0%
157
D
7%
158
E
1%
157
127
140
153
+Easier 146.629 +SubsectionMedium

To the editor:
For generations, magnificent racehorses have been bred in our area. Our most valuable product, however, has been generations of children raised with the character that makes them winners in the contests of life. Gambling is wrong, and children raised in an atmosphere where the goal is to get something for nothing will not develop good character. Those who favor developing good character in children over gambling on horses should vote against allowing our first racetrack to be built. L.E.

Summarize Argument
L.E. concludes that people who value raising children with good character more than gambling should vote against building a racetrack in their area. This is for two reasons: gambling is wrong, and raising children in an environment where the goal is be rewarded for nothing prevents them from developing good character.

Notable Assumptions
L.E. assumes that normalizing gambling by allowing a racetrack to be built will create an environment in which the goal is to get something for nothing. This leads to another assumption: that gambling and raising children with good character are mutually exclusive.

A
If good character is developed in children early, the children continue to have good character in different environments.
This does not affect the argument. L.E. claims that children who are exposed to gambling through the atmosphere described will not develop good character in the first place, which makes (A) irrelevant.
B
In other areas with gambling, parents are able to raise children of good character.
This weakens the argument. It shows that gambling and raising children with good character are not mutually exclusive, as the author assumes. Other areas have been shown to have both.
C
In most areas with horse racing, the percentage of adults who gamble increases gradually from year to year.
This does not affect the argument. The argument is about gambling on horses and its effect on children, not adults.
D
Children whose parents gamble do not necessarily gamble when they become adults.
This does not affect the argument. The argument is not that children who grow up around gambling will gamble, but that children who grow up around gambling will not develop good character.
E
Where voters have had the opportunity to vote on horse racing, they have consistently approved it.
This does not affect the argument. L.E. is not trying to make a prediction about which way the vote will go—L.E. is making an argument about how people should vote based on their values.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply