LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 06

April 21, 2012

Elena: The best form of government is one that fosters the belief among its citizens that they have a say in how the government is run. Thus, democracy is the best form of government.

Marsha: But there are many forms of government under which citizens can be manipulated into believing they have a say when they don’t.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Elena believes that democracy is the best form of government. She believes this because the best form of government is one where the people believe they have a say in how it is run.
Marsha points out that many forms of government manipulate people into thinking that they have a say in how the government is run when they really don’t.

Identify Argument Part
This is utilized to weaken the relationship between Elena’s premise and conclusion. Marsha’s statement shows that just because a populace believes they have a say over government affairs, it does not mean that they *actually* do or are living in a democracy.

A
concur with Elena’s claim that democracy is the best form of government
Marsha does not say whether democracy is the best form of government. She challenges Elena's reasoning by suggesting that the feeling of having a say can be manipulated in non-democratic systems.
B
support Marsha’s unstated conclusion that the best form of government is one that appears to be democratic but really is not
This is not an unstated conclusion anywhere in Marsha’s argument. She is just pointing out an assumption in Elena’s reasoning
C
suggest that the premise Elena uses to support her conclusion could be used to support a conflicting conclusion
This is an accurate description of Marsha’s claim. She suggests that Elena’s premise could also support the conclusion that other forms of government could be considered the best if they manipulated their citizens to believe they were in control.
D
support Marsha’s unstated conclusion that most people seek only the appearance of democracy rather than democracy itself
This is not an unstated conclusion in Marsha’s argument. There is nothing about people wanting the appearance of democracy.
E
reject Elena’s conclusion that the best form of government is democracy
Marsha does not go this far. She is merely casting doubt on Elena’s reasoning that democracy is the best form of government.

7 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 07

April 21, 2012

13 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 08

April 21, 2012

Otis: Aristotle’s principle of justice says that we should treat relevantly similar cases similarly. Therefore, it is wrong for a dentist to schedule an after-hours appointment to suit a family friend but refuse to do it for anyone else.

Tyra: I accept Aristotle’s principle of justice, but it’s human nature to want to do special favors for friends. Indeed, that’s what friends are—those for whom you would do special favors. It’s not unjust for dentists to do that.

Speaker 1 Summary
Otis concludes that it’s wrong for a dentist to schedule an after-hours appointment for a family friend but not to do it for someone else. This is because Aristotle’s principle of justice says that we should treat relevantly similar cases similarly. Otis’s assumption is that the case of a family friend and the case of someone else are relevantly similar.

Speaker 2 Summary
Tyra concludes that dentists’ treating friends differently from others does not violate Aristotle’s principle of justice. This is because friends are those for whom we do special favors.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether it’s wrong for dentists to schedule after-hours appointments for friends, but not for others. They also disagree about whether the case of friends and others are relevantly similar.

A
Aristotle’s principle of justice is widely applicable
Neither speaker expresses an opinion. They agree with Aristotle’s principle of justice, but neither suggests any belief about how widely it’s applicable. Tyra doesn’t say the principle doesn’t apply to the dentist situation. She’s applies the principle, but finds no violation.
B
situations involving friends and situations involving others should be considered relevantly similar cases
This is a point of disagreement. Otis thinks they are relevantly similar. This is why he thinks inconsistent treatment is wrong. Tyra doesn’t think they’re relevantly similar. This is why she doesn’t find anything wrong with inconsistent treatment.
C
human nature makes it impossible to treat relevantly similar cases similarly
Neither expresses an opinion. Otis doesn’t discuss human nature. Tyra says it’s human nature to want to help our friends. That doesn’t mean it’s impossible to treat similar cases similarly.
D
dentists should be willing to schedule an after-hours appointment for anyone who asks
Neither expresses an opinion about this. Otis only wants dentists to do such scheduling consistently. Either friends and others both get after-hours, or neither do. Tyra only says after-hours appointments for friends is not unjust. She doesn’t say what dentists should do.
E
Aristotle recognizes that friendship sometimes morally outweighs justice
Neither expresses an opinion. Nobody discusses Aristotle’s views about friendship and whether it can outweigh justice.

12 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 09

April 21, 2012

4 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 10

April 21, 2012

7 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 11

April 21, 2012

12 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 12

April 21, 2012

Researcher: A number of studies have suggested that, on average, clients in short-term psychotherapy show similar levels of improvement regardless of the kind of psychotherapy they receive. So any client improvement in short-term psychotherapy must be the result of some aspect or aspects of therapy that are common to all psychotherapies—for example, the presence of someone who listens and gives attention to the client.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author concludes that any improvement in short-term psychotherapy must be the result of some aspect that is in common with all psychotherapies. This is because various studies show that, on average, clients in short-term psychotherapy show similar levels of improvement regardless of the kind of psychotherapy they get.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that there’s no other explanation for why people who get different kinds of psychotherapy, on average, experience the same levels of improvement besides the theory that all improvements from psychotherapy must come from something shared by all psychotherapies. This overlooks the possibility that, for example, different psychotherapies might have unique aspects that each produce a similar level of improvement.

A
The methods by which the studies measured whether clients improved primarily concerned immediate symptom relief and failed to address other important kinds of improvement.
This shows that we can’t rely on the studies to make a conclusion about “any” improvement. (A) opens the possibility that different psychotherapies might lead to different levels of certain kinds of improvements due to aspects that are not in common with other psychotherapies.
B
On average, clients improve more dramatically when they receive long-term psychotherapy, a year or longer in duration, than when clients receive short-term psychotherapy.
The premises and conclusion are only concerned with short-term psychotherapy. The author never assumes anything about long-term psychotherapy, so it won’t weaken to point out some difference between long-term and short-term psychotherapy.
C
The studies found that psychotherapy by a trained counselor does not result in any greater improvement, on average, among clients than does simple counseling by an untrained layperson.
The author suggests as an example that psychotherapies might help due to the presence of someone who listens. (C) is consistent with that proposal, since it could be the fact someone is listening that produces the improvements described.
D
The specific techniques and interventions used by therapists practicing different kinds of psychotherapy differ dramatically.
The author never suggested that the specific techniques and interventions can’t be different. The author simply hypothesizes that the improvement doesn’t come from those differences — it comes from something that’s similar between the psychotherapies.
E
More-experienced therapists tend to use a wider range of techniques and interventions in psychotherapy than do inexperienced therapists.
The author never suggested that different practitioners won’t use different ranges of techniques. The author simply hypothesizes that the improvement doesn’t come from any differences between the techniques used — it comes from something that’s similar among different therapies.

46 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 13

April 21, 2012

5 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 14

April 21, 2012

2 comments

LSAT 130 - Section 3 - Question 15

April 21, 2012

Sonya: Anyone who lives without constant awareness of the fragility and precariousness of human life has a mind clouded by illusion. Yet those people who are perpetually cognizant of the fragility and precariousness of human life surely taint their emotional outlook on existence.

Summary

If someone lies without constant awareness of the fragility and precariousness of human life, then they have a mind clouded by illusion. People who are perpetually aware of the fragility and precariousness of human life taint their emotional outlook on existence.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Everyone has either a mind clouded by illusion or a tainted emotional outlook on existence. If someone’s mind is unclouded by illusion, then their emotional outlook on existence is tainted. If someone’s emotional outlook on existence is not tainted, then their mind is clouded by illusion.

A
Anyone who places a higher priority on maintaining a positive emotional outlook than on dispelling illusion will be completely unaware of the fragility and precariousness of human life.

This is unsupported because it is not the emotional outlook that produces an awareness of fragility and precariousness. Rather, it is the awareness of fragility and precariousness of human life that is sufficient for a certain emotional outlook.

B
Either no one has a tainted emotional outlook on existence, or no one has a mind clouded by illusion.

This is unsupported because some people could fall into either category. Some people may be aware of the fragility and precariousness of human life while others are not.

C
It is impossible for anyone to live without some degree of self-deception.

This is unsupported because it is possible for people to be always cognizant of the fragility and precariousness of human life, which may not require self-deception.

D
Everyone whose emotional outlook on existence is untainted has a mind clouded by illusion.

This is strongly supported because everyone must be either constantly aware of the fragility and precariousness of human life or they are not. If their emotional outlook on existence is untainted, then they are not aware of the fragility and precariousness of life.

E
It is better to be aware of the fragility and precariousness of human life than to have an untainted emotional outlook on existence.

This is unsupported because the author provides no means for determining which state of awareness is better.


32 comments

«‹831832833834835836837838839840841842843844845846847848849850851›»