LSAT 143 – Section 4 – Question 15

LSAT 143 - Section 4 - Question 15

June 2015

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:07

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
PT143 S4 Q15
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
2%
154
B
77%
165
C
18%
161
D
1%
150
E
3%
156
131
146
161
 +Medium 146.108 +SubsectionMedium

Legislator: My staff conducted a poll in which my constituents were asked whether they favor high taxes. More than 97 percent answered “no.” Clearly, then, my constituents would support the bill I recently introduced, which reduces the corporate income tax.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that her constituents would support the bill she introduced. This is because the bill reduces the corporate income tax, and, according to a poll, her constituents do not “favor high taxes.”

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the current corporate income tax constitutes a “high tax” in a way that the constituents would not favor. This overlooks the possibility that the corporate income tax is not actually high. It also overlooks that the constituents might have been referring to high personal taxes rather than corporate taxes.

A
fails to establish that the opinions of the legislator’s constituents are representative of the opinions of the country’s population as a whole
The author’s conclusion doesn’t extend to the population as a whole. So whether the constituents are representative of the whole population doesn’t matter.
B
fails to consider whether the legislator’s constituents consider the current corporate income tax a high tax
If the constituents don’t consider the current corporate income tax a high tax, that raises the possibility they wouldn’t necessarily support the bill simply because it reduces the corporate income tax. The constituents might be OK with the current corporate income tax.
C
confuses an absence of evidence that the legislator’s constituents oppose a bill with the existence of evidence that the legislator’s constituents support that bill
The author doesn’t argue, “Because there’s no evidence my constituents oppose the bill, they must support the bill.” The author’s premise concerns a poll about high taxes; it’s not a claim about a lack of evidence.
D
draws a conclusion that merely restates a claim presented in support of that conclusion
(D) describes circular reasoning. The conclusion does not restate anything in the premises, which describe the results of a poll.
E
treats a result that proves that the public supports a bill as a result that is merely consistent with public support for that bill
There is nothing that “proves” the public supports a bill. All we know from the premises concerning any kind of opinion is that the constituents are not in favor of high taxes. This doesn’t tell us whether they would support any bill.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 143 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply