LSAT 112 – Section 3 – Question 24

LSAT 112 - Section 3 - Question 24

December 2001

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

Target time: 0:24

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
PT112 S3 Q24	+LR	Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method Causal Reasoning +CausR	A 2% 149 B 5% 154 C 86% 161 D 4% 150 E 3% 150	136 144 152	+Medium	144.548 +SubsectionEasier

A newspaper article on Britain’s unions argued that their strength was declining. The article’s evidence was the decreasing number and size of strikes, as if the reason for the unions’ existence was to organize strikes. Surely, in a modern industrial society, the calling of a strike is evidence that the negotiating position of the union was too weak. Strong unions do not need to call strikes. They can concentrate their efforts on working with others in the labor market to achieve common goals, such as profitable and humane working conditions.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author concludes that calling a strike indicates that the negotiating position of a union is weak. As evidence, the author points out that strong unions do not need to call strikes. Instead, these unions concentrate on working with others in the labor market to achieve common goals.

Describe Method of Reasoning

The author counters the position held by newspaper article. He does this by showing that the cause-and-effect relationship the article bases their claim on is reversed. It’s not that a decreasing number of strikes causes a union to lose strength, it’s that a union gaining strength causes the number of strikes to decrease.

questioning the accuracy of the statistical evidence that the newspaper article uses

The author does not question the accuracy of the article’s evidence. In fact, the author uses the same evidence that the article uses. The author is simply using this evidence to support a different conclusion.

detailing historical changes that make the newspaper article’s analysis outdated

The author does not address historical changes. Moreover, the author does not claim that the article’s analysis is outdated. The author thinks that the article’s analysis is flat out incorrect.

reinterpreting evidence that the newspaper article uses as indicating the opposite of what the newspaper concludes

The evidence the article uses is the evidence that the number and size of union strikes are decreasing. The article claims this is evidence of unions losing strength, whereas the author uses this as evidence of unions gaining strength.

arguing that the newspaper article’s conclusion is motivated by a desire to change the role of unions

The author does not address the motives of the article. The author addresses the article’s argument directly without focusing on personal characteristics.

pointing to common interests among unions and management which the newspaper article ignores

The author does not claim that the article ignores certain evidence. We cannot assume the article ignores this evidence just because the author did not mention it when summarizing the article’s argument.

LSAT 112 – Section 3 – Question 24

LSAT 112 - Section 3 - Question 24

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 112 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel