Logical reasoning PrepTest 129 · Section 2 · Question 21

Incorrect. The follows the conclusion and is introduced by "for," highlighting it as a premise of the argument and definitely not a possible objection to the conclusion.

Incorrect. While the argument does treat it as a fact, it is n't one that has misled social critics. For a fact to mislead someone, they must believe it but misconstrue it. The social critics are wrong because they believe the opposite of the statement in question to be true.

Incorrect. Any statement introduced with "for" must be a premise.

Incorrect. This answer is, in many ways, the opposite of the correct answer. The statement in question is a fact that undermines the false assumption that the opposing point relies on.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
Social critics—It's a shame that we sent a man to the moon but can't solve social problems.
Assumption—Space flight is more difficult than social problems
Counterpoint—Rocket science is simpler than the human psyche, understanding which is necessary to solve social problems
Conclusion—The social critics are wrong

Answer Anticipation:
The Editorial is quite long as far as stimuluses go, so it's important to work through it deliberately in order to see each element of the argument.

It starts with what "social critics say," and since this statement is attributed to a specific group, it's likely a counterpoint. This categorization is justified by the following statement which points out an assumption of that argument—pointing out an assumption of an argument is a great start to rebutting it.

After the assumption, the Editorial pivots ("however") to an opinion of the opposing point—it's misplaced. Opinions on the opposing point are almost always the main point, and it being followed with a statement introduced by "for"—a premise indicator—backs that up. The statement in question is this premise, and it's followed by another premise that builds from it ("and"), so we're looking for an answer that says the statement in question is a premise.

However, it's rare that the correct answer in an Argument Structure question limits itself to saying a statement is a premise—generally, it'll go into more detail than that. Here, the statement in question is a premise undermining the opposing point, so we should figure out what it attacks from that viewpoint. Comparing this statement to that opposing point, we can see that it attacks the assumption the Editorial pointed out. With that in mind, we should be able to find our answer.

Answer Explanation:
One way to undermine an argument is to attack its assumptions. The statement in question contradicts the assumption of the social critics, and this answer reflects that.

Key Takeaway:
Harder Argument Structure questions will feature longer and more convoluted arguments, and more complex answer choices. However, they'll still feature elements common to arguments across the LSAT—opposing points, pivots, premise indicator words, etc . . . Slow down your read since you won't have to spend time looking for assumptions and make sure you really understand how the argument progresses. Especially if the statement in question is a premise, you'll likely need to understand the entire argument to be able to describe how that premise supports the conclusion.