LSAT 113 – Section 3 – Question 01

LSAT 113 - Section 3 - Question 01

June 2002

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:02

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
PT113 S3 Q01
+LR
+Exp
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
1%
157
B
1%
156
C
12%
161
D
85%
166
E
2%
158
128
142
156
 +Medium 146.265 +SubsectionMedium

Moralist: TV talk shows are contributing to the moral decline in our country. By constantly being shown the least moral people in our society, viewers begin to think that such people are the norm, and that there is something wrong with being morally upright.

TV talk show host: Well, if there is such a decline, it’s not because of TV talk shows: we simply show people what they want to see. What can be wrong with letting the viewers decide? Furthermore, if restrictions were put on my show, that would amount to censorship, which is wrong.

Speaker 1 Summary
The moralist concludes that TV talk shows are contributing to moral decline. This is because the shows portray the least moral people, which makes viewers think being immoral is normal and that there’s something wrong with being morally upstanding.

Speaker 2 Summary
The host’s implicit conclusion is that there’s nothing wrong with what her TV talk show is doing. She asserts that any moral decline, if it exists, isn’t caused by TV talk shows. She also asserts that there’s nothing wrong with letting viewers decide what they want see. Additionally, she claims that any restrictions on her show would be censorship, and therefore wrong.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether TV shows are a cause of moral decline. The moralist thinks they are, and the host thinks they’re not.

A
TV talk shows should be censored
The moralist doesn’t express an opinion. Although the moralist thinks TV talk shows cause moral decline, that doesn’t mean the moralist thinks anything should be done about it. We just don’t know his opinion.
B
people’s moral standards have changed
The host doesn’t express an opinion. She says that if there’s a moral decline, TV talk shows aren’t a cause of it. She doesn’t say whether there actually is a moral decline or moral change.
C
TV talk shows influence people’s conception of what is the norm
Not a point of disagreement. The host doesn’t comment on whether TV talk shows influence the viewers. Although she does say that shows simply portray what people want to see, that doesn’t mean the host thinks the shows have no impact on viewers’ conception of what’s normal.
D
TV talk shows, by presenting immoral guests, are causing a moral decline
This is a point of disagreement. The moralist thinks TV talk shows do cause a moral decline by presenting immoral guests. The host does not think TV talk shows cause a moral decline.
E
it is wrong not to let the viewers decide what they want to see
The moralist expresses no opinion. Although she states that TV talk shows are causing a moral decline, that doesn’t tell us what she thinks about restricting what viewers can watch. Maybe she’s opposed to putting restrictions on shows, just like the host is.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 113 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply