PrepTest 112

[lcid:3546] Prep Test 112 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Critic: Although some people 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

Principle Questions / Strengthen Questions

Stimulus Summary

Some people - You can’t support freedom of speech and limits on TV violence
Critic - You can support both freedom of speech and limits on TV violence. Violent TV does more damage than limits of free speech.

Answer Anticipation

Principle (Strengthen) questions generally present a judgment in the conclusion backed up by details from the premises. Our task is to connect the details to the premises.
This argument starts by bringing up an opposing point (“some people claim”), but then it immediately pivots to the Critic’s opinion of that point - it’s wrong. We should rephrase that to reflect the Critic’s actual opinion:
You can support both freedom of speech and limits on violent TV programs
What does the Critic use to back that determination up? That violence on TV does more harm than free speech limitations. So the conclusion is based on a balance of the relative harms done by the two things in question.
In other words, it’s possible to believe in free speech while also believing in limits on free speech if those limitations address a danger posed by the freedom. Let’s find an answer that reflects this balancing of interests.
One note before we head to the answers - this conclusion isn’t about whether there should be limits on free speech. The Critic’s conclusion is about the compatibility of two beliefs, not whether those beliefs are right.

Answer choices

  1. A
    In evaluation legislation that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    First, there’s no direct statement that freedom of speech is a basic freedom, but let’s look past that for a second. Even if it is, considering the consequences doesn’t say anything about how those consequences should be weighed, and whether there are situations where that consideration will lead to a justifiable curtailing of the speech. It also doesn’t address the compatibility of believing in free speech and limits on certain speech.
  2. B
    One can support freedom Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    This answer addresses the ability to support free speech while still supporting limitations on it, as the conclusion states. This is based on recognizing that other interests sometimes outweigh freedom of speech - such as an interest in preventing the harm associated with violent TV programs. Since this answer justifies the opinion in the conclusion based on the evidence presented, it’s the correct answer.
  3. C
    When facing a choice Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Happiness isn’t mentioned in the stimulus at all, so this answer is out of scope. Even if violent TV programs cause damage, there’s no indication that people are generally unhappy about that.
  4. D
    If the exercise of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    The Critic’s conclusion is that a belief in free speech and limits on that speech are compatible, not about whether free speech should be limited. As such, this answer is a principle for a different argument about whether these limitations should be passed.
  5. E
    In some circumstances, we Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Similar to (E), the Critic’s conclusion is about the compatibility of a couple beliefs, not the correctness of them.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion