PrepTest 107

[lcid:3527] Prep Test 107 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Political opinion and analysis Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

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

Strengthen with Necessary Premise Questions

Stimulus Summary

Phenomenon - TV talk shows have mainstream political views
Explanation 1 - The TV stations have a political agenda
Pivot/Goal - TV stations want to make money by getting large audiences
Conclusion - This is the real explanation for the mainstream political views

Answer Anticipation

(Wow, this is the exact same question type as the last one! We don’t have to do any new work - our Summary and Anticipation for this question will be the same as the last!)
First, let’s start with the question stem. While the language here isn’t specifically stating that this is a Strengthen with Necessary vs. Sufficient Premise, when the stem is silent on that issue, the correct answer will always be a necessary premise. It’ll often also be sufficient, but that’s not a requirement for a correct answer.
Now, to the argument itself. It’s an interesting mix of two of our common patterns. There’s a Phenomenon presented (the mainstream views on TV talk shows), and an Explanation for it. However, the Author then pivots to a Goal of TV stations, which calls that explanation into question. From that, it concludes that the Goal is the real explanation for bland/innocuous political views on these shows.
Since we’re looking for an assumption made by the author of the passage, let’s focus on that half of the argument. There, we learn that the goal of the TV stations is to make money by having a large audience. This is why, the Author contends, they air bland and innocuous political views.
However, two issues there. First, there’s no indication that such views will lead to a large audience! Maybe people watch TV talk shows to listen to people they disagree with, or to hear outlandish arguments. The Author here is assuming that bland/innocuous political views lead to viewers, so let’s find an answer making that connection. Second, the stimulus is about mainstream political views, but the Author shifts to discussing bland/innocuous views. Maybe the mainstream views are actually outlandish! This shift in concepts is another thing we can look for answers about.

Answer choices

  1. A
    television station executives usually Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    The argument concludes that having a political agenda isn’t an explanation for the mainstream political views on TV talk shows. However, that doesn’t require that the TV station execs lack such an agenda - maybe their political agenda is the promotion of mainstream views!
  2. B
    bland and innocuous political Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    This answer connects the premise and conclusion. In the premise it’s established that TV shows feature mainstream political views. From this, the argument concludes that the political views on the shows are bland and innocuous. That’s a jump - there’s no indication that the mainstream views are bland and innocuous. If they’re not, then the argument falls apart, making this a necessary premise.
  3. C
    political analysts outside the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    What is true of the analysts who aren’t on these shows and how they feel about being frozen out is out of scope of an argument about why they’re not placed on these shows to begin with.
  4. D
    most television viewers are Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    The argument concerns why controversial views aren’t aired on TV shows in the first place. While the networks knowing that people would argue against airing those views would help an explanation as to them not airing them, it’s not a requirement for them to do so. Even if people wouldn’t argue against airing those views, they still may predominantly watch shows that don’t air them.
  5. E
    the political opinions of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Without knowing what the political views of these executives are, we don’t know how this affects the argument.

What this tests

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.