PT127.S4.P3.Q20 > Analytics

Hide analysis

Passage A.

█████ ██ ██ ███████████ ████████ ██████████ ██████ █████████████ ███ ███ ███ ████ █████████ ██████████ ███

Problem · No common legal definition for "national minority"

Provide background · Two definitions in use

(1) People in one country with ethnic ties to another country; (2) People who have ethnic ties only to the country they live in, but who are an ethnic or cultural minority in that country.

Expand problem · Vague terminology

"People" and "nation" are vaguely defined.

Notable impact of problem · Roma people

The Roma are a minority group, yet neither definition applies to them because they do not have ethnic ties to any country.

███████ █

Topic of passage B · Capotorti's definition of "minority"

Five criteria: (1) Smaller than the rest of the population; (2) Nondominant; (3) Distinctive characteristics; (4) Desire to preserve their culture; (5) Citizens of the country where they live.

Problem · Definition doesn't apply to the Roma

Because of criterion #5, the legal criterion of citizenship.

Author's perspective · Citizenship criterion shouldn't be included in Capotorti's definition

Because countries can deny the Roma minority status simply by denying them citizenship.

████████ ███ ████ ██████ ███████ ███ ████ █████████ ████████ ██ ███████████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ██████████ ██ ██████████ █ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ████████ ███████ ████████████ ████ ███ ███████ ████ █ █████████ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ████ █████████ ██ ████ ███████ █████ ███████████ ████████ ██ ██████████████ ███ ███ ████ ████████████ ██ █ ████████ ██ ████ ███████ ███ ████ ████ █ ██████ ██ ███████████ ███████████ ███████ ███ █████████ ████████████████ ███ ████████ ████ █████ ███████ ██ █████████████ ████████ █████████ ████ █████████ ████ ██████ ████ ████ █████ ███ ███████████ █████ ███ █████ ████████ █████ ███ █████ ████████ ██████ ████ █████████████████ █████████ ████ ████ ████ █████████ █████ █████████ ████████ ███ ████████ ███████ █████████ ██ ███████████ ██ ████████ ██████ ██ █████ ██████ ██ ████████ █████ ████████

Application · Of Capotorti's definition to Roma

The Roma meet all criteria except citizenship. Author's perspective: the Roma should be considered a minority throughout Europe.

Passage Style

20.

The relationship between which one ██ ███ █████████ █████ ██ █████████ ██ ████ █████████ ██ ███ ████████████ ███████ ███████ █ ███ ███████ ██

Question Type

Analogy (RC)

Passage A discusses the lack of clear definition of “minority” under international law and how the Roma are affected by this. Passage B also discusses the definition of minority; it doesn’t claim that the definition is unclear, but rather, that the Roma should be considered to meet that definition. Let’s look for an answer that involves the first document arguing that there’s something unclear and it causes a problem. The second passage should apply criteria and argue that something fits those criteria.

"The Lack of █████████ ████████ ███ ███████████ ████ ██ █████████ ██████ ████████ ███ ████████ ███ ██ ██████████████ ████████ ████ ███████ ████████ ███ ███████ ████████ ███ ██████████████ ██ ████ ██ ████████████

This is the most analogous. The first document points out a lack of clarity (”lack of clear-cut criteria”) and how it causes problems. The second document argues that something fits certain criteria.

62%

"Why the Current ████████ ███ ████████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ████ ███████████ ████████ ███ ██ ██████ ██ ███ █████████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ █████████ ██ ████████████ ██████████

Not analogous, because the first document doesn’t point out the lack of clarity in something. Also, the second document doesn’t argue that something meets criteria.

"The Need for █ ███████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ████████ ██ █████ █████████ █████ ███ ███ ███████████ ███ ███████████ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ██████ ███████ ███████ ███ ██ █████ ████████

Not analogous, because the first document doesn’t point out the lack of clarity in something. Also, the second document doesn’t argue that something meets criteria.

17%

"The Lack of █████████ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ █ ███████ █████████ ███ ████████████ ███ █████████ █████ ████████████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ █████████ ██████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██████████

Not analogous, because the first document doesn’t point out the lack of clarity in something. You might think that Passage A argues for a new definition, but you actually can’t find that in Passage A. In addition, the second document doesn’t argue that something meets criteria. Passage B doesn’t merely list criteria; it argues that the Roma fit that criteria.

"The Conceptual Links ███████ ███████████████ ███ █████████ ██████████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████ █████████ █████ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████████████ ███ ██████████

Not analogous, because the first document doesn’t point out the lack of clarity in something. Also, the second document doesn’t argue that something meets criteria.

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

It takes about five minutes.

Take the free diagnostic

More free LSAT prep: Sample LSAT questions Full-length diagnostic & practice test All free LSAT resources

PrepTest 127 - Section 4 - Passage 3 - Question 20

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action

PrepTest 127 - Section 4 - Passage 3 - Question 20

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Want to know why the right answer is right?