LSAT 131 – Section 2 – Question 15

LSAT 131 - Section 2 - Question 15

December 2009

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:47

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
PT131 S2 Q15
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Link Assumption +LinkA
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
52%
166
B
26%
162
C
3%
162
D
10%
159
E
9%
161
151
163
176
 +Hardest 147.936 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

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

Bowers: A few theorists hold the extreme view that society could flourish in a condition of anarchy, the absence of government. Some of these theorists have even produced interesting arguments to support that position. One writer, for example, contends that anarchy is laissez-faire capitalism taken to its logical extreme. But these theorists’ views ignore the fundamental principle of social philosophy—that an acceptable social philosophy must promote peace and order. Any social philosophy that countenances chaos, i.e., anarchy, accordingly deserves no further attention.

Summarize Argument
The author’s implicit conclusion is that the theorists’ view that society can flourish in a condition of anarchy (in the sense of absence of government) isn’t acceptable. This is based on the premise that any acceptable social philosophy must promote peace and order. The author believes the theorists’ view is something that promotes anarchy (in the sense of chaos), which is why he believes the view isn’t acceptable.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author inappropriately interprets the term “anarchy” in a different way from how the theorists used it. The theorists defined anarchy as the absence of government. But the author mistakenly thinks the theorists’ view condoned anarchy in the sense of chaos (absence of order). This misrepresents the theorists’ view and renders the author’s criticism unpersuasive.

A
the meaning of a key term shifts illicitly during the course of the argument
The meaning of “anarchy” inappropriately shifts. The theorists used “anarchy” to mean absence of government. But in arguing against the theorists’ view, the author uses “anarchy” in the sense of chaos.
B
the argument fails to show that laissez-faire capitalism deserves to be rejected as a social philosophy
The author isn’t attempting to reject laissez-faire capitalism. Laissez-faire capitalism is simply mentioned as part of an illustration of the kind of arguments some theorists make in support of the idea that society can flourish without government.
C
the truth or falsity of a view is not determined by the number of people who accept it as true
The author does not reject the theorists’ view on the basis of the number of people who believe it.
D
the argument presumes, without providing justification, that any peaceful society will flourish
The author argues against the idea that society can flourish in a condition of anarchy. But the author doesn’t take any position on what is sufficient to make a society flourish.
E
it is unreasonable to reject a view merely because it can be described as extreme
Although the author does mention that the view is extreme, he does not reject the view on the basis of its being extreme. The basis is the mistaken belief that the view countenances anarchy (in the sense of chaos).

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 131 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply