LSAT 156 – Section 2 – Question 11
LSAT 156 - Section 2 - Question 11
July 2020You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.
Target time: 1:04
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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PT156 S2 Q11 |
+LR
| Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw | A
6%
150
B
5%
153
C
3%
146
D
82%
158
E
5%
151
|
120 132 149 |
+Easiest | 145.275 +SubsectionEasier |
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Professor Thomas says Professor York is too flamboyant and confrontational in the classroom. The author implicitly calls this claim into question by citing the fact that Thomas’s claim is self-serving. Thomas is not as good a presenter as York, so Thomas’s criticism of York may simply be a result of envy.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author attacks Professor Thomas’s motivation rather than the merits of his claim. Whether Thomas is venting his frustration or otherwise making comments due to envy or out of self-interest has nothing to do with the truth of whether Professor York is actually too flamboyant or confrontational in the classroom.
A
confuses the distinction between being overly confrontational and engaging students by entertaining them
The author doesn’t mistake being too confrontational with being entertaining. There’s no sign that the author thinks one type of behavior is the same as the other.
B
presupposes the point it is attempting to establish
(B) describes circular reasoning. The author’s conclusion, which is an implicit questioning of Professor Thomas’s claim about Professor York, does not restate a premise.
C
mistakes Professor Thomas’s characterization of a view for an endorsement of that view
The author does not think Thomas endorsed anything that York did or said.
D
attacks Professor Thomas personally rather than addressing Professor Thomas’s argument
The author attacked Professor Thomas’s motivations rather than addressing the substance of Professor’s Thomas’s argument. We care about whether York is too flamboyant and confrontational. Thomas’s motive is irrelevant.
E
rejects the possibility that Professor York is in fact too confrontational
There’s a difference between rejecting Thomas’s conclusion that York is too confrontational and criticizing Thomas’s argument in favor of that conclusion. The author does the latter.
Take PrepTest
Review Results
LSAT PrepTest 156 Explanations
Section 1 - Reading Comprehension
- Passage 1 – Passage
- Passage 1 – Questions
- Passage 2 – Passage
- Passage 2 – Questions
- Passage 3 – Passage
- Passage 3 – Questions
- Passage 4 – Passage
- Passage 4 – Questions
Section 2 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
Section 3 - Reading Comprehension
- Passage 1 – Passage
- Passage 1 – Questions
- Passage 2 – Passage
- Passage 2 – Questions
- Passage 3 – Passage
- Passage 3 – Questions
- Passage 4 – Passage
- Passage 4 – Questions
Section 4 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
- Question 26
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment. You can get a free account here.