LSAT 103 – Section 3 – Question 23

LSAT 103 - Section 3 - Question 23

September 1998

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:47

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 S3 Q23
+LR
Inference +Inf
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
Rule-Application +RuleApp
Eliminating Options +ElimOpt
A
1%
164
B
50%
169
C
8%
164
D
24%
165
E
16%
165
155
167
179
 +Hardest 148.537 +SubsectionMedium

Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one candidate for a position and there is at least one issue important to her, Kay uses the following principle in choosing which course of action to take: it is acceptable for me to vote for a candidate whose opinions differ from mine on at least one issue important to me whenever I disagree with each of the other candidates on even more such issues; it is otherwise unacceptable to vote for that candidate. In the upcoming mayoral election, the three candidates are Legrand, Medina, and Norton. There is only one issue important to Kay, and only Medina shares her opinion on that issue.

Summary
Whenever considering voting in an election, and there’s at least one issue important:
If disagree with candidate X on an important issue, but if disagree with ALL other candidates on a greater # of important issues → acceptable to vote for candidate X.
If disagree with candidate X on an important issue, but do NOT disagree with ALL other candidates on a greater # of important issues → NOT acceptable to vote for candidate X.
In the upcoming election, there’s only 1 issue important. Kay agrees with Medina on that issue. Kay does not agree with Legrand or Norton on that issue.

Very Strongly Supported Conclusions
It is not acceptable for Kay to vote for Legrand or Norton. This is because she disagrees with them on an important issue, but she does not disagree with all other candidates on a greater # of important issues. (She agrees with Medina on the 1 important issue, and there are no other important issues. So if she disagrees with Legrand and Norton on that issue, there’s no way that she can disagree with all other candidates, including Medina, on a greater # of important issues.)

A
it is acceptable for Kay to vote for either Medina or Legrand, but it is unacceptable for her to vote for Norton
Anti-supported, because it is not acceptable for Kay to vote for Legrand. (See summary for explanation.)
B
the only unacceptable courses of action are for Kay to vote for Norton and for her to vote for Legrand
Supported, because it’s unacceptable for Kay to vote for Legrand or Norton. (See summary for explanation.)
C
it is unacceptable for Kay to vote for any of the candidates
Not supported, because it’s possible that voting for Medina is acceptable. We have no reason to think it’s unacceptable to vote for Medina, because Kay agrees with Medina on the 1 important issue.
D
the only unacceptable course of action is for Kay to vote for Medina
Anti-supported, because it’s unacceptable for Kay to vote for Legrand or Norton.
E
it is acceptable for Kay to vote for any of the candidates
Anti-supported, because it’s unacceptable for Kay to vote for Legrand or Norton.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 103 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply