LSAT 132 – Section 4 – Question 12

LSAT 132 - Section 4 - Question 12

December 2010

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:15

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
PT132 S4 Q12
+LR
Main conclusion or main point +MC
A
1%
156
B
3%
158
C
4%
158
D
83%
164
E
9%
155
135
146
156
 +Medium 146.238 +SubsectionMedium

Political scientist: It is not uncommon for a politician to criticize his or her political opponents by claiming that their exposition of their ideas is muddled and incomprehensible. Such criticism, however, is never sincere. Political agendas promoted in a manner that cannot be understood by large numbers of people will not be realized for, as every politician knows, political mobilization requires commonality of purpose.

Summarize Argument
Criticism by politicians that their opponents’ ideas are incomprehensible is insincere. Incomprehensible political agendas will not be realized because political mobilization requires many people to work with a common purpose. Every politician knows this. This implies that any politician would not actually promote their ideas incomprehensibly, making the criticism insincere.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s claim about criticizing political opponents for incomprehensible messaging: “Such criticism, however, is never sincere.”

A
People who promote political agendas in an incomprehensible manner should be regarded as insincere.
This misrepresents the argument. The criticism is what the political scientist calls insincere, not those who promote agendas incomprehensibly.
B
Sincere critics of the proponents of a political agenda should not focus their criticisms on the manner in which that agenda is promoted.
The author makes no claims about what sincere critics do. Additionally, the author only claims that criticisms about incomprehensibility are insincere. There could be other valid criticisms on the manner of promotion.
C
The ineffectiveness of a confusingly promoted political agenda is a reason for refraining from, rather than engaging in, criticism of those who are promoting it.
The political scientist simply claims that the criticism is insincere. He does not make claims about reasons to refrain or engage in the criticism.
D
A politician criticizing his or her political opponents for presenting their political agendas in an incomprehensible manner is being insincere.
This accurately paraphrases the conclusion. The political scientist says this type of criticism is insincere, therefore a politician who engages in it is being insincere.
E
To mobilize large numbers of people in support of a political agenda, that political agenda must be presented in such a way that it cannot be misunderstood.
This is support for why criticism about incomprehensibility is insincere. Political messaging must necessarily be understandable.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 132 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply