LSAT 108 – Section 2 – Question 12

LSAT 108 - Section 2 - Question 12

February 2000

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:48

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT108 S2 Q12
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
A
12%
162
B
3%
159
C
84%
167
D
1%
147
E
1%
157
127
142
157
 +Medium 145.001 +SubsectionEasier

Undoubtedly, one’s freedom is always worth the risk of losing one’s life. Consider a person who is locked in a bare cement room with no hope of escape. This person is not really living and has nothing to lose.

A
presumes, without providing justification, that nothing can have greater value than one’s own freedom
The author doesn’t presume this. She argues that one’s freedom is always worth the risk of losing one’s life, but she never says that nothing is more valuable than freedom. The author may believe that many things are more valuable than freedom.
B
fails to consider that it is not always possible to rebel physically against an encroachment on one’s freedom
The author doesn’t state or imply that she thinks it’s always possible to rebel physically against an encroachment on one’s freedom, and her stance on this issue is irrelevant to the soundness of her conclusion.
C
generalizes inappropriately from a single extreme case to a universal claim
This is the flaw that the author commits. Using a single, extreme example of someone locked in a cement room, the author then makes a universal claim that one’s freedom is always more valuable than the risk of losing one’s life. The example doesn’t necessarily justify the claim.
D
fails to establish that the freedom of others is worth taking risks for
The author’s argument isn’t concerned with the freedom of others. The author’s argument is only concerned with one’s own freedom and life.
E
overlooks the possibility that some people do not have the courage to take risks for freedom
We don’t know if the author overlooks this. However, even if she does, it has no bearing on whether her conclusion, that one’s freedom is always more valuable than the risk of losing one’s life, is valid.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 108 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply