PrepTest 142
[lcid:3666] Prep Test 142 LSAT — Reading Comp — S3
Reading comp
Passage
Questions 22-27 This passage is adapted from a review of a 1991 book. . In a recent study, Mario Garcia
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Social Science
Paragraph 1
Garcia's evidence is persuasive that the Mexican American Generation anticipated the Chicano reforms, but his argument that they were more radical and politically diverse than previously thought has two flaws.
Key Lines:
Lines 7-10 - The Author concedes an accuracy in Garcia's argument
Lines 10-11 - The Author brings up two flaws in Garcia's thesis, showing her opinion and previewing the passage's structure
Lines 12-15 - The first flaw is defined
Lines 30-36 - The Author highlights the main point of her rebuttal to this flaw
Lines 37-40 - The second flaw is defined
Lines 51-52 - The Author's rebuttal is stated
Lines 57-60 - The Author highlights an assumption of Garcia's argument
Meta-Structure:
Traditional View/New View - The Author brings up Garcia's argument, which states that the Mexican American Generation was "more radical and politically diverse" than previously thought. So there's a traditional view that is being challenged by a new view. Normally, the Author is in favor of the new view, or at least neutral, but here . . .
Rebuttal - The Author actually rebuts Garcia's view, highlighting two flaws in it.
Last Thoughts:
It's going to be really important that we understand the two flaws as highlighted by the Author, so let's make sure we understand them.
The first flaw is that Garcia's evidence of political diversity is not consistent. So we need to know where the contradiction in it is. What's inconsistent about it? Well, on the one hand, he's arguing that there were a lot of different viewpoints—after all, that's what political diversity is. However, Garcia also argues that the differences were "insignificant" (Lines 27-28). He can't have it both ways—either these differences are significant and thus show that there was political diversity in the Mexican American Generation, or the differences are insignificant.
The second flaw comes down to an assumption the Author points out in Garcia's argument—he assumes that "an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase in the ethnic Mexican population's activism" (Lines 57-60). However, there's no evidence this is true, and the Author brings up a number of factors that could prevent it from being true.
So the first criticism shows that Garcia treats differences as both significant and insignificant, highlighting an inconsistency; and that he assumes a representativeness that isn't established.
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- A traditional view, a view challenging that, and the Author's opinion of the latter are offered
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Garcia (and traditional implied) Mexican American Generation political activists (1930-1960) were more radical and politically diverse than previously thought
- Author - Garcia's evidence is persuasive that they anticipated reforms of "more militant Chicanos"
- Author - Garcia's study has two flaws
- Paragraph note
- Author - Garcia's study has two flaws
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Evidence for political diversity not consistent
- Ex - Debate over assimilation (League of United Latin American Citizens) versus cultural maintenance (Congress of Spanish-Speaking People)
- Garcia - The differences were insignificant - their focus was liberal reform
- Author - No, this was an intense debate, not consensus
- Paragraph note
- Flaw 2 - Activists might not have been representative
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Trend - By 1930, percentage of Mexican American population born in US had gone up
- Garcia - They were acculturated and more politically active, influenced by discrimination and WWII, and wanted full civil rights
- Author - This assumes the trend resulted in more politically active people, but factors in ethnic consciousness mean this is a bad assumption
Garcia's evidence is persuasive that the Mexican American Generation anticipated the Chicano reforms, but his argument that they were more radical and politically diverse than previously thought has two flaws.
Key Lines:
Lines 7-10 - The Author concedes an accuracy in Garcia's argument
Lines 10-11 - The Author brings up two flaws in Garcia's thesis, showing her opinion and previewing the passage's structure
Lines 12-15 - The first flaw is defined
Lines 30-36 - The Author highlights the main point of her rebuttal to this flaw
Lines 37-40 - The second flaw is defined
Lines 51-52 - The Author's rebuttal is stated
Lines 57-60 - The Author highlights an assumption of Garcia's argument
Meta-Structure:
Traditional View/New View - The Author brings up Garcia's argument, which states that the Mexican American Generation was "more radical and politically diverse" than previously thought. So there's a traditional view that is being challenged by a new view. Normally, the Author is in favor of the new view, or at least neutral, but here . . .
Rebuttal - The Author actually rebuts Garcia's view, highlighting two flaws in it.
Last Thoughts:
It's going to be really important that we understand the two flaws as highlighted by the Author, so let's make sure we understand them.
The first flaw is that Garcia's evidence of political diversity is not consistent. So we need to know where the contradiction in it is. What's inconsistent about it? Well, on the one hand, he's arguing that there were a lot of different viewpoints—after all, that's what political diversity is. However, Garcia also argues that the differences were "insignificant" (Lines 27-28). He can't have it both ways—either these differences are significant and thus show that there was political diversity in the Mexican American Generation, or the differences are insignificant.
The second flaw comes down to an assumption the Author points out in Garcia's argument—he assumes that "an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase in the ethnic Mexican population's activism" (Lines 57-60). However, there's no evidence this is true, and the Author brings up a number of factors that could prevent it from being true.
So the first criticism shows that Garcia treats differences as both significant and insignificant, highlighting an inconsistency; and that he assumes a representativeness that isn't established.
Question prompt
The passage suggests that
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.
Question Type
Social Science
Answer choices
-
AIncreased ethnic consciousness among Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 45-46; Lines 47-48; Lines 52-60) While Garcia's assumption does relate to an increase in political activity among Mexican Americans during this time period, it's not based on increased ethnic consciousness. He attributes it to increased acculturation, experiences with discrimination, and inclusive WWII slogans. It's the Author that brings up variations in ethnic consciousness. -
BIncreased familiarity among Mexican Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Must Be True
Strategy Overview:
Review what Garcia is said to have assumed of this group and then find an answer lining up with that
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
This question highlights the importance of what we said during our Last Thoughts? section—the importance of really understanding any criticism put forward by the Author. There, we noted that the second flaw was about an assumption Garcia made.
What was the assumption? That "an increase in the proportion of Mexican Americans born in the United States necessarily resulted in an increase in the ethnic Mexican population's activism" (Lines 57-60). Let's find an answer reflecting that assumption.
Answer Explanation:
(Lines 45-46; Lines 57-60) Garcia's assumption does relate to an increase in political activity among Mexican Americans during this time period, and he attributes it to the generation being born in the US and thus being "more acculturated." This answer is therefore correct.
Key Takeaway:
Assumptions are a huge part of the LSAT, permeating almost every argument you'll come across. In RC, when a viewpoint is criticized for making an assumption, be sure to note it, as it'll almost certainly show up in a question. -
CThe assimilation of many Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 46) Garcia believes that this group was more politically active, so this answer is contradicted. -
DMany Mexican Americans were Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. (Line 10) The only mention of militancy is in Line 10, and it's the Author categorizing a group as being more militant, not Garcia. -
EMany Mexican Americans were Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. (Line 48) Garcia argued that the WWII slogans were inclusive, not patronizing.
What this tests
Discussion
-
Missing something 1 reply
Started by Hannah-Anderson