LSAT 151 – Section 4 – Question 03

LSAT 151 - Section 4 - Question 03

September 2018

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:56

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
PT151 S4 Q03
+LR
+Exp
Main conclusion or main point +MC
Rule-Application +RuleApp
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
98%
162
B
2%
151
C
0%
146
D
0%
149
E
0%
153
126
133
140
 +Easiest 145.196 +SubsectionEasier

Politician: The legal right to free speech does not protect all speech. For example, it is illegal to shout “Fire!” in a crowded mall if the only intent is to play a practical joke; the government may ban publication of information about military operations and the identity of undercover agents; and extortion threats and conspiratorial agreements are also criminal acts. The criminalization of these forms of speech is justified, since, although they are very different from each other, they are all likely to lead directly to serious harm.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the criminalization of certain kinds of speech is justified, because they are likely to lead directly to serious harm.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s judgment about free speech restrictions: “The criminalization of these forms of speech is justified.”

A
it is legitimate to prohibit some forms of speech on the grounds that they are likely to lead directly to serious harm
This is a paraphrase of the conclusion. The author argues that it is legitimate (justified), to prohibit (criminalize) some forms of speech.
B
a form of speech can be restricted only if it is certain that it would lead directly to serious harm
“Only if” describes a necessary condition for restricting speech. The author never argued that anything was necessary for restricting speech.
C
in all but a few cases, restricting speech eventually leads directly to serious harm
The author never argued that restricting speech usually leads to serious harm.
D
any form of speech may, one way or another, lead directly to serious harm
The author never argued that any form of speech can lead to serious harm.
E
all but one of several possible reasons for restricting freedom of speech are unjustified
The conclusion isn’t about what reasons for restricting speech are unjustified. Rather, the conclusion is that certain restrictions are justified.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 151 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply