LSAT 107 – Section 1 – Question 02

LSAT 107 - Section 1 - Question 02

October 1999

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:23

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
PT107 S1 Q02
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
96%
164
B
0%
164
C
3%
161
D
1%
151
E
0%
163
120
120
134
 +Easiest 147.515 +SubsectionMedium

Politician: The funding for the new nationwide health-awareness campaign should come from an increase in taxes on cigarettes. It is well established that cigarette smoking causes many serious health problems, and it is only reasonable that people whose unhealthful habits cause so many health problems should bear the costs of that campaign.

Smoker: But it is equally well established that regularly eating high-fat, high-cholesterol foods causes as many serious health problems as does smoking, yet it would be manifestly unreasonable to force those who purchase such foods to bear the burden of financing this campaign.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
In response to the politician’s claim that the new nationwide health-awareness campaign should be funded by increasing taxes on cigarettes, the smoker counters that regularly eating high-fat and high-cholesterol foods cause as many serious health problems as smoking. Moreover, the smoker states it would be unreasonable to force consumers of these foods to bear the burden of financing the campaign.

Describe Method of Reasoning
The smoker counters the position held by the politician. He does this by providing a counterexample. If consuming certain foods cause as many serious health problems as smoking, but it would be unreasonable for the consumers of these foods to bear the burden of financing the campaign, then it is likely equally unreasonable for smokers to bear the burden of financing the campaign.

A
offers a counterexample that calls into question the politician’s reasoning
The counterexample is the people who consume high-fat and high-cholesterol foods. The politician’s reasoning questionable because, if it is unreasonable to force these people to fund the campaign, then it is likely unreasonable to force smokers to fund the campaign.
B
presents an alternative solution to that proposed by the politician
The smoker does not propose any solution.
C
argues that the method proposed by the politician would be inadequate for its intended purpose
The smoker does not state that the politician’s proposal is inadequate. Rather, the smoker implies that the politician’s proposal is unfair because similarly situated groups would not bear the burden of financing the campaign.
D
questions the accuracy of the information cited by the politician in reaching a conclusion
The smoker does not question the politician’s premises. In fact, the smoker concedes that smoking causes as many serious health problems compared to ingesting high-fat and high-cholesterol foods.
E
illustrates how the politician’s proposal could aggravate the problem it is intended to solve
The smoker does not suggest that the politician’s proposal would cause people to smoke more cigarettes.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 107 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply