LSAT 117 – Section 3 – Question 23

LSAT 117 - Section 3 - Question 23

October 2004

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:16

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
PT117 S3 Q23
+LR
+Exp
Necessary assumption +NA
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
24%
162
B
1%
156
C
1%
152
D
66%
168
E
7%
161
151
160
169
 +Hardest 146.848 +SubsectionMedium

Editorial: This political party has repeatedly expressed the view that increasing spending on education is a worthy goal. On other occasions, however, the same party has claimed that the government should not increase spending on education. So this party’s policy is clearly inconsistent.

Summary
The author concludes that the party’s policy is inconsistent. This is based on the fact that the party has expressed the following views at different times:
Increasing spending on education is a worthy goal.
The government should not increase spending on education.

Notable Assumptions
One view expressed by the party is that increasing spending on education is a worthy goal. Is that inconsistent with, at other times, thinking that the government should not increase spending on education? Not necessarily. Maybe increasing spending on education is a worthy goal, but there are times when there are even more worthy goals, so the government should increase spending for other things instead of education. There’s nothing inherently contradictory about the views expressed.
It’s not clear what we should anticipate, but we should go into the answers with the understanding that the author assumes that the party’s expression of both views is somehow inconsistent.

A
It is inconsistent for a legislator both to claim that increasing spending on education is a worthy goal and to vote against increasing spending on education.
We don’t know that the party voted against increased spending on education. All we know about are views that the party has expressed.
B
A consistent course of action in educational policy is usually the course of action that will reduce spending on education in the long run.
The author doesn’t have to assume anything about effectiveness at reducing spending. The argument simply concerns two views and whether they are inconsistent.
C
Even if a goal is a morally good one, one should not necessarily try to achieve it.
Not necessary, because the argument doesn’t concern what should or should not be achieved. The argument simply concerns two views and whether they are inconsistent.
D
A consistent political policy does not hold that an action that comprises a worthy goal should not be performed.
Necessary, because if it were not true — if a consistent political policy CAN hold that an action that comprises a worthy goal should not be performed — then there’s nothing about the two views that warrants thinking there’s an inconsistent policy. The two views can be part of a consistent policy, if (D) were negated.
E
Members of one political party never have inconsistent views on how to best approach a political issue.
The argument doesn’t concern claims about individual members of a party. It’s about whether the party itself has a policy that’s inconsistent.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 117 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply