LSAT 104 – Section 1 – Question 15

LSAT 104 - Section 1 - Question 15

December 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: 1:01

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
PT104 S1 Q15
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
Quantifier +Quant
Math +Math
A
94%
169
B
3%
159
C
2%
161
D
0%
148
E
1%
147
135
143
151
 +Medium 149.106 +SubsectionMedium

Tony: Few anarchists have ever performed violent actions. These few are vastly outnumbered by the violent adherents of other political ideologies. Therefore, the special association in the public mind between anarchism and political violence is unwarranted.

Keisha: Anarchists have always been few in number, whereas other ideologies have often spawned mass movements. Therefore, the proportion of anarchists who are violent is possibly greater than the proportion of adherents of other ideologies who are violent.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
In response to Tony’s claim that the association between anarchism and political violence is unwarranted, Keisha concludes that the proportion of violent anarchists is possibly greater in comparison to other ideologies. As evidence, she points out that anarchism has always had few members in comparison with other ideologies.

Describe Method of Reasoning
Keisha counters the position held by Tony. She does this by positioning the small number of violent anarchists in the context of the total population of anarchists. Even if violent anarchists are outnumbered by the violent adherents of other ideologies, the proportion of violent anarchists might be greater than the proportion of violent adherents of other ideologies.

A
She shows that Tony’s conclusion is questionable because Tony bases it on a comparison that inappropriately involves absolute numbers rather than proportions.
The comparison Tony makes is between the absolute number of violent anarchists compared to the absolute number of violent adherents of other ideologies. Keisha thinks Tony’s conclusion is questionable without acknowledging the proportion of violent members in each group.
B
She attempts to undermine Tony’s conclusion by introducing plausible evidence that is incompatible with the evidence Tony offers in support of that conclusion.
The evidence Keisha offers is not incompatible with Tony’s evidence. Rather, Keisha is pointing out that Tony’s conclusion is questionable without considering the factors she mentions.
C
She questions the accuracy of the claims on which Tony bases his conclusion.
Keisha does not question the accuracy of Tony’s claims. Rather, Keisha is pointing out that Tony’s premises do not necessarily support his conclusion because his argument only accounts for absolute numbers instead of proportions.
D
She presents evidence that the two groups Tony has compared have no significant qualities in common.
Keisha’s evidence does not suggest that she thinks the two groups Tony compares have no qualities in common. She acknowledges Tony’s comparison and questions it because Tony fails to consider proportions between groups.
E
She indicates that Tony has adopted questionable criteria for including certain people in the groups he is comparing.
Tony does not provide any criteria for determining who belongs to a certain group.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 104 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply