LSAT 158 – Section 3 – Question 23

LSAT 158 - Section 3 - Question 23

May 2020

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:26

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
PT158 S3 Q23
+LR
+Exp
Inference +Inf
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
41%
165
B
41%
157
C
4%
153
D
6%
158
E
7%
155
156
164
173
 +Hardest 145.724 +SubsectionMedium

According to rational-choice theory, popular support for various political parties can be explained sufficiently in terms of deliberate decisions by individual voters to support the party whose policies they believe will yield them the greatest economic advantage. This theory is opposed by many sociologists on the grounds that a complex phenomenon such as the rise of a political organization cannot be caused by a simple phenomenon.

Summary
According to rational-choice theory, we can explain why various political parties are popular in terms of deliberate decisions by voters to support parties they believe will bring the voters the greatest economic advantage.
Many sociologists oppose this theory. They oppose this theory based on the premise that a complex phenomenon — such as the popularity of political parties — cannot be caused by a simple phenomenon.

Very Strongly Supported Conclusions
The sociologists must believe that voters’ choosing to support parties based on which party they think will bring the most economic advantage is a simple phenomenon. This is something the sociologists must think in order for their premise to support their conclusion. If voters’ choosing to support based on economic advantage were NOT a simple phenomenon, then why would the sociologists reject rational-choice theory on the basis of the belief that a complex phenomenon can’t be explained by simple a phenomenon?

A
economically motivated decisions by voters need not constitute a complex phenomenon
This must be assumed by the sociologists. This is why they think voters’ supporting parties based on economics can’t explain a complex phenomenon such as the rise of political parties. To the sociologists, voters’ supporting parties based on economics is too simple to explain this.
B
a complex phenomenon generally will have many complex causes
The sociologists believe a complex phenomenon can’t be caused by a simple phenomenon. But this doesn’t mean they think a complex phenomenon must have “many” complex causes. They’re open to a single non-simple cause of a complex phenomenon.
C
political phenomena often have religious and cultural causes as well as economic ones
We have no basis to think the sociologists believe religious and cultural causes are involved. All we know is they think the “voters support parties based on economics” is too simple to explain support for political parties. Whether religious and cultural factors must be involved is unknown.
D
popular support for political parties is never a complex phenomenon
Anti-supported, because the sociologists believe that “the rise of a political organization” is a complex phenomenon.
E
the decisions of individual voters are not usually influenced by their beliefs about which policies will yield them the greatest economic advantage
The sociologists don’t believe that voters aren’t deciding based on economic advantage. Rather, the sociologists don’t believe that this can explain why different parties become popular. There’s a difference between denying X, and denying that X causes Y. The sociologists are denying that X causes Y. That doesn’t mean they deny that X occurs.

This is an Inference question.

The question stem says “properly inferred” from the sociologist's perspective. Inference from others' perspective is a question type that we see more often in RC.

The stimulus starts by telling us what rational choice theory says about what causes support for political parties. It says that popular support for political parties is caused by individual voters making deliberate decisions to support those parties whose policies they believe will economically benefit them. In other words, individuals' beliefs about the economic consequences of a particular party's policies cause those individuals to support those parties. This causal relationship is what is meant by “sufficiently explained.”

But the sociologists don't agree. They oppose rational choice theory on the premise that a complex phenomenon like the rise of a political organization or party cannot be caused by a simple phenomenon.

What is this “simple phenomenon”? It must be the individual voters making economic decisions to support political parties, which implies that it must not be a complex phenomenon. This is what Correct Answer Choice (A) says. Sociologists believe that economically motivated decisions by voters need not constitute a complex phenomenon. We are getting hints of an NA question. Note how (A) could have stated this much more strongly. Economically motivated decisions by voters constitute a simple phenomenon. That would have been correct as well. But the test writers took it one step further and stated an inference of that statement.

Answer Choice (B) says a complex phenomenon generally will have many complex causes. This is unsupported. The sociologists only said that a complex phenomenon cannot be caused by a simple phenomenon. This leaves open several possibilities. Perhaps they believe that a complex phenomenon can be caused by many simple phenomena. Or perhaps they believe that a complex phenomenon can be caused by a single complex phenomenon. We’d have to dismiss those alternatives without warrant in order to arrive at (B).

Answer Choice (C) says political phenomena often have religious and cultural causes as well as economic ones. This is even more unsupported. Note the same reasoning in (B) applies here. Additionally, (C) draws an inference to religious and cultural causes on the basis of nothing.

Answer Choice (D) says popular support for political parties is never a complex phenomenon. This is anti-supported. The sociologist called the rise of a political organization a complex phenomenon. Within the context of the stimulus, the rise of the political organization is synonymous with popular support for a political party.

Answer Choice (E) says the decisions of individual voters are not usually influenced by their beliefs about which policies will yield them the greatest economic advantage. This is unsupported. The stimulus talks about a narrow political relationship. It examines the causes of the rise of popular political parties. (E) talks about a much broader political relationship, the causes of individual voting decisions. The stimulus has very little to say about what generally causes (influences) or doesn't cause voters to cast their vote one way or another.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 158 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply