LSAT 138 – Section 3 – Question 16

LSAT 138 - Section 3 - Question 16

December 2012

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

Target time: 1:36

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
PT138 S3 Q16	+LR	Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw Conditional Reasoning +CondR Causal Reasoning +CausR Link Assumption +LinkA	A 83% 165 B 2% 156 C 5% 158 D 6% 160 E 4% 158	136 147 158	+Medium	147.528 +SubsectionMedium

Political scientist: People become unenthusiastic about voting if they believe that important problems can be addressed only by large numbers of people drastically changing their attitudes and that such attitudinal changes generally do not result from government action. The decreasing voter turnout is thus entirely due to a growing conviction that politicians cannot solve the most important problems.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The political scientist argues that decreasing voter turnout is entirely explained by people losing faith in the government’s ability to solve problems. This is because people losing faith in government’s ability to change public opinion, which they believe is necessary to solve society’s problems, is an example of something that causes people to lose enthusiasm for voting.

Identify and Describe Flaw

This argument is flawed because it treats a sufficient condition as if it were a necessary condition. In other words, the argument assumes that because a loss of faith in government’s ability to solve problems can cause people to lose interest in voting, that it must be what’s causing voter turnout to decrease in this case. However, there could be other conditions also sufficient to decrease voter turnout. The argument fails to consider possible alternative explanations for falling turnout.

presumes, without providing justification, that there is no cause of decreasing voter turnout other than the belief that few important problems can be solved by government action

This describes how the argument fails to consider other possible alternative explanations for decreasing voter turnout, instead assuming that a loss of faith in government must be what’s causing it.

presumes, without providing justification, that there are no political solutions to the most important problems

The argument isn’t concerned with whether or not these problems are solvable. It only makes a claim about what’s causing voter turnout to decrease.

infers that important problems can be seriously addressed if people’s attitudes do change from the premise that these problems cannot be addressed if people’s attitudes do not change

The argument only makes a claim about what’s causing voter turnout to decrease, not about whether any problems can or can’t be addressed. The flaw is failing to consider other possible causes.

undermines its claim that people no longer believe there are political solutions to important problems by suggesting that people are dissatisfied with politicians

People being dissatisfied with politicians does not undermine this claim; it could explain why those people don’t believe in political solutions.

presumes, without providing justification, that voter apathy prevents the attitudinal changes that result in finding solutions to important problems

The argument doesn’t presume that voter apathy has any particular effects; it only seeks to explain what’s causing the apathy.

LSAT 138 – Section 3 – Question 16

LSAT 138 - Section 3 - Question 16

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 138 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel