LSAT 103 – Section 2 – Question 04

LSAT 103 - Section 2 - Question 04

September 1998

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

Target time: 1:07

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
PT103 S2 Q04	+LR	Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw Link Assumption +LinkA	A 3% 161 B 0% 158 C 87% 167 D 9% 162 E 1% 161	129 142 155	+Medium	149.468 +SubsectionMedium

Politician P: My opponent claims that the government is obligated to raise taxes to increase funding for schools and health care. Because raising taxes to increase funding for schools and health care would make taxpayers upset over their loss of buying power, my opponent is simply mistaken.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

Politician P concludes that an opponent is wrong to say that the government is obligated to raise taxes to better fund school and health care. In support, P says that such a policy would upset taxpayers.

Identify and Describe Flaw

P concludes that the government is not obligated to take a particular action, because that action would upset people. This doesn’t address the opponent’s core claim that an obligation exists.

presupposing that a claim is mistaken on the grounds that the person defending it advocates other unpopular views

P never mentions whether or not the opponent advocates for other unpopular views.

assuming that a claim is false on the grounds that the person defending it is of questionable character

P doesn’t talk at all about anyone’s character, and doesn’t attack the opponent’s character.

concluding that a view is false on the grounds that its implementation would lead to unhappiness

P concludes that the opponent’s view about a government obligation to raise taxes is “mistaken,” meaning false, and as support only says that raising taxes would make people unhappy. This doesn’t actually address whether or not there’s an obligation.

appealing to wholly irrelevant issues to deflect attention away from the real issue

P isn’t appealing to wholly irrelevant issues—taxpayers’ response to a tax policy change is still a relevant consideration, even if it doesn’t establish that the government has no obligation to better fund schools and health care.

insisting that an obligation exists without offering any evidence that it exists

P isn’t insisting that an obligation exists. Instead, it’s the opposite: P’s opponent claims that an obligation exists, and P claims that the obligation does not exist.

LSAT 103 – Section 2 – Question 04

LSAT 103 - Section 2 - Question 04

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 103 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel