PrepTest 111

[lcid:3542] Prep Test 111 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Columnist: A recent study Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Argument Structure Questions / Must Be True Questions

Stimulus Summary

Recent study - Having a parrot increases your risk of lung cancer
Implication - No one thinks the government should tax owning a parrot
Conclusion - The government shouldn’t tax equipment for dangerous hobbies

Answer Anticipation

First, we need to discuss the question stem. Four of the answers are logically consistent with the stimulus, but one isn’t - in other words, it’s logically inconsistent with the stimulus. When we’re looking for an answer that’s inconsistent with the stimulus, we’re dealing with a Cannot be True question. And it’s also important to note here that being logically consistent with claims doesn’t mean that they must be true - just that they can be true. So four wrong answers can be true; one right answer can’t be.
Now, let’s take a step back and deal with the Principle part of the stem. The correct answer will be a principle that the stimulus is inconsistent with. So we should sketch out what principle is underlying the Columnist’s argument, and then find an answer that contradicts it.
The Columnist uses the parrot example to support a conclusion about several hobbies (hunting, skiing, parachuting, and motorcycling). We should identify the principle that connects them all. And there, it’s bringing up dangerous things (including owning a parrot, which apparently can be a factor in lung cancer, somehow) that the government shouldn’t tax. So, in short, the principle that the Columnist is relying on is that the government shouldn’t tax things even when they pose a danger to the people engaged in them.
The correct answer, then, will likely state that the government should/is justified in taxing dangerous hobbies. Let’s find that answer.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The government should fund Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    The argument is over whether the government is justified in taxing dangerous things, not whether the government would be justified in funding education with a tax on these things. While this answer does feature the taxing of equipment the stimulus says shouldn’t be taxed, the reasoning behind a conclusion is relevant in Principle questions, and this one misses the mark. Since it is out of scope of the argument, it’s logically consistent with it, so we can rule it out.
  2. B
    The government should not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    The Columnist says that those who engage in these hobbies shouldn’t be taxed, but she’s silent on other groups. If anything, she seems on board with not taxing people, which this answer aligns with!
  3. C
    The government should create Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem
    The Columnist argues that these dangerous activities shouldn’t be taxed. This answer states that the government should tax them. Those two views are inconsistent/contradictory, so this is the correct answer.
  4. D
    The government should not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    The Columnist says that the government shouldn’t tax people doing dangerous things; this answer says the same. They’re aligned with each other, not inconsistent.
  5. E
    The government would be Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    This answer has nothing to do with the stimulus, so it doesn’t contradict the information there!

What this tests

Discussion

  • Why not A/E? 3 replies

    Started by Kyle

View all discussions Start a discussion