PrepTest 110

Incorrect. This answer doesn't connect to the judgment in the conclusion—namely, that the claim shouldn't be taken seriously.

Incorrect. The conclusion is that we're not obliged to take this claim seriously, so whether people actually do is out of scope.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
Some people's claim is not very interesting, so we shouldn't take it seriously.

Answer Anticipation:
One skill that's very important to develop while studying for the LSAT is cutting down arguments to the core—just the information that's key to the logic.

Here, the conclusion is a judgment on an opposing view—it shouldn't be taken seriously. Judgments such as that generally need two parts. First, they need a rule that determines what should and shouldn't be taken seriously. Second, they need to show that the rule applies to the view in question and points to it not being taken seriously.

In this case, there's no rule presented in the premises. Instead, we're told that the claim that shouldn't be taken seriously is uninteresting. Since that's the basis for the conclusion, the author must be assuming that a "rule" that applies here is uninteresting claims shouldn't be taken seriously. Let's look for an answer establishing that connection.

Answer Explanation:
This answer connects what we know about the opposing claim to the judgment drawn about it. The claim of some people is uninteresting. If that means it's not worthy of serious consideration then the conclusion holds. This answer therefore strengthens the argument.

Key Takeaway:
When a conclusion in an argument forms a judgment—especially on an opposing view or on what should/shouldn't be done—there needs to be a premise that establishes a "rule" for when that judgment can be drawn. This very much lines up with Principle questions—while the stem doesn't mention a principle the assumptions in an argument such as this one very much fit into that category! Principles are necessary parts of some arguments so when it's missing the correct answer generally brings it up.

Incorrect. The author of the argument conditions the conclusion on the opposing point not "giv[ing] us a more interesting interpretation" of their claim. That neither assumes nor rejects the possibility of doing so!

Incorrect. First, the author says that the claim in question (or, at least, the one interpretation of it) is both trivial and uninteresting. Second, the author implies that claims can be neither of these things (as she presumably believes that there are claims that should be taken seriously). Third, this answer doesn't connect to seriousness.