LSAT 129 – Section 3 – Question 08

LSAT 129 - Section 3 - Question 08

June 2009

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:55

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
PT129 S3 Q08
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
3%
162
B
0%
152
C
93%
164
D
1%
156
E
3%
162
120
120
126
 +Easiest 146.07 +SubsectionMedium

City council member: The Senior Guild has asked for a temporary exception to the ordinance prohibiting automobiles in municipal parks. Their case does appear to deserve the exception. However, if we grant this exception, we will find ourselves granting many other exceptions to this ordinance, some of which will be undeserved. Before long, we will be granting exceptions to all manner of other city ordinances. If we are to prevent anarchy in our city, we must deny the Senior Guild’s request.

Summarize Argument
The council member concludes that to prevent anarchy, the council must deny the Senior Guild’s request for an exception. As support, he says that granting this exception would lead to other, undeserved exceptions and eventually to exceptions to all kinds of city ordinances.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The council member’s argument is vulnerable to criticism because he never provides evidence to support the key assumption that granting the Senior Guild’s exception would inevitably cause the council to grant undeserved exceptions to all kinds of city ordinances. Similarly, he never gives reason to believe that granting the request would cause anarchy.

A
distorts an argument and then attacks this distorted argument
The council member never attacks, distorts, or even presents any argument made by the Senior Guild. Instead, he presents his own argument for why the Guild’s exception should be denied.
B
dismisses a claim because of its source rather than because of its content
This is the cookie-cutter “ad hominem” flaw. The council member doesn’t make this mistake. He argues that the Guild’s request should be denied, but he doesn’t do so by attacking the Guild itself. In fact, he concedes that the Guild deserves this exception.
C
presumes, without sufficient warrant, that one event will lead to a particular causal sequence of events
The council member assumes that granting the Senior Guild’s exception will lead to a particular causal sequence of events— all manner of other exceptions and anarchy. But he doesn't offer any reason to think that one will actually cause the other.
D
contains premises that contradict one another
The council member’s premises may not support his conclusion well, but they never contradict one another.
E
fails to make a needed distinction between deserved exceptions and undeserved ones
The council member actually does distinguish between undeserved and deserved exceptions by pointing out that the Senior Guild’s exception is deserved, while some others are not. He just fails to take that distinction into consideration in his argument.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 129 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply