Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.1K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 2 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 1 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 9 Forum Rules
- 574 Technical Problems
- 280 Off-topic
PT19.S4.Q10 - audiences find a speaker more convincing
http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-19-section-4-question-10/
I am confused as to why A is the answer choice and not B.
According to Kaplan, they say if A is correct then it'll be a rare candidate who takes a chance on the authors strategy, as the media may only air the opposition and disregard the later support. They further that by stating that media is a huge part of national campaigning. But wouldn't that be an outside assumption we would make. And aren't we only suppose to take what is given within the stimulus to support our answers? Because that is why I disregarded A as an answer, thinking who cares what the media covers because it doesn't limit the SPEECH, the speech is still given and still heard from those attending and such. Where as if you choose B if many people do not find politicians in the first place then that would make practically any strategy they choose ineffective, no one trust them... Can someone help me where my thinking has gone wrong here?
I am confused as to why A is the answer choice and not B.
According to Kaplan, they say if A is correct then it'll be a rare candidate who takes a chance on the authors strategy, as the media may only air the opposition and disregard the later support. They further that by stating that media is a huge part of national campaigning. But wouldn't that be an outside assumption we would make. And aren't we only suppose to take what is given within the stimulus to support our answers? Because that is why I disregarded A as an answer, thinking who cares what the media covers because it doesn't limit the SPEECH, the speech is still given and still heard from those attending and such. Where as if you choose B if many people do not find politicians in the first place then that would make practically any strategy they choose ineffective, no one trust them... Can someone help me where my thinking has gone wrong here?
Comments
B - There's no clear takeaway from this. This applies to any argument style that a politician may use. Since it's given in the stimulus that politicians are going to have debates, the answer choice here doesn't discredit the argumentative technique in question over any other technique that a pol may use.
C - This supports the conclusion, because we read in the stimulus that the technique makes speakers appear "fair minded and trustworthy".
D - Similar to C. Supports the conclusion as the technique involves consideration of the opponent's side.
E - Size of audience is irrelevant here.
On A - Assuming that some reporting of debates takes place, this suggests a potential cost to use of the technique that would give candidates reason to not use the technique. Weakens the conclusion that candidates should use the technique.