PrepTest 103

[lcid:3508] Prep Test 103 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S1 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Lambert: The proposal to Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

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

Argument or Facts

Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed/Flawed

Question Type

Methods of Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

L: Drivers who don’t use mass transit shouldn’t have to pay for it, so the gas tax to pay for mass transit is unfair. K: The government spends more on highways than mass transit, and the gas tax will let the government even this out, so you misunderstand the situation.

Answer Anticipation

Whenever a Methods of Reasoning question features a second speaker, we should start with a couple considerations: Does the second speaker agree or disagree with the first speaker’s conclusion? If she disagrees, does she think it’s wrong or unsupported? Does the second speaker agree or disagree with the first speaker’s premises? Logic/assumptions? Does she bring up a new consideration? Here, Keziah definitely seems to disagree with Lambert’s conclusion that using the gas tax to pay for mass transit is unfair. Specifically, however, she starts by stating that he misunderstands the situation. As such, she’s likely going to bring up new information that he’s missing that leads to this misunderstanding. And that is what she does - she brings up the current distribution of funds to show that this isn’t anything other than a rebalancing since the government has been using general funds in a way that skews towards those who drive, since it’s spent on highways. In other words, Lambert says that the new system is unfair because it takes money from drivers and gives it to those who take mass transit. Keziah rebuts this by showing that the system currently takes money from those who take mass transit and gives it to drivers, and this new system evens it out.

Answer choices

  1. A
    elaborating the context of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    This answer highlights Keziah’s method of rebuttal. She provides additional context - the current levels of spending between highways and mass transit - in order to show that the proposal isn’t unfair, but rather rebalances things.
  2. B
    appealing to the principle Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Keziah doesn’t discuss a benefit to society as a whole, so this answer is out of scope.
  3. C
    challenging the presupposition that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Keziah addresses fairness by showing that the proposal rebalances the spending between highways and mass transit, so she implicitly accepts fairness as a consideration.
  4. D
    demonstrating that the proposed Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    The gas tax will definitely hit drivers, who buy gas, and Keziah doesn’t attempt to refute that.
  5. E
    declining to argue a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Keziah does believe that Lambert has misunderstood the situation, but she doesn’t claim that he’s “poorly informed” and she does argue the point with him, so this answer is incorrect.

What this tests

Discussion

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

View all discussions Start a discussion