LSAT 128 – Section 3 – Question 08

LSAT 128 - Section 3 - Question 08

December 2008

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:16

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
PT128 S3 Q08
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
Analogy +An
A
1%
152
B
1%
157
C
6%
163
D
89%
167
E
4%
156
132
143
154
 +Medium 145.461 +SubsectionMedium

Live Commentary

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

Politician: It is widely accepted that because democratic politics cannot exist without debate about political issues, and because self-governance flourishes when citizens are allowed to express their feelings verbally, a democratically governed society should refrain from interfering in individual citizens’ speech. I argue that a democratically governed society should also refrain from exercising strict control over the clothing and grooming of its citizens, for this is clearly a venue of self-expression, and it can also serve to make a variety of political statements, without using words.

Summarize Argument
The politician concludes that a democratic society should not control its citizens’ personal appearance. This is supported by the claims that personal appearance is a way for citizens to express themselves and potentially make political statements. This makes appearance similar to the free verbal expression upon which democratic societies rely.

Describe Method of Reasoning
The politician describes an accepted attitude toward one case and draws an analogy to another case with comparable features to reason that a similar attitude should apply to the latter case. By presenting personal appearance as analogous to free speech because both allow expression, the politician argues that democratic societies should not control personal appearance, just as they should not control speech.

A
argue for a conclusion by suggesting that the opposite conclusion leads to an absurdity
The politician does not discuss the implications of the opposite conclusion to the one reached in the argument. The argument is presented directly, without discussing counter-arguments.
B
reach a general conclusion based on the absence of clear counterexamples to an empirical thesis
The politician does not reach a general conclusion at all, only a conclusion about the specific case of personal appearance in a democracy. Also, there’s no empirical thesis here which could lack counterexamples.
C
support a conclusion by claiming that it is widely accepted
The politician does not claim that the conclusion drawn in the argument is widely accepted. The only widely accepted attitude which the politician cites is about an analogous case used to support the conclusion.
D
reach a conclusion based on evidence that is similar to evidence commonly thought to support an analogous case
The politician concludes that personal appearance should be free in a democratic society based on evidence that personal appearance is a form of self-expression, and self-expression is commonly thought to support the analogous case of verbal free speech.
E
reach a conclusion about what democratically governed societies actually do based on premises about what democratically governed societies should do
The politician doesn’t make a conclusion about what democratic societies actually do, only about what they should do.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 128 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply