LR Drill Set 11, Question 5
Olivia: Democracy in ancient Athens led to an(58 more words not shown)
The reasoning in Karl's argument(10 more words not shown)
- Aoverlooks the possibility(15 more words not shown)
- Bpresumes, without providing(14 more words not shown)
- Coverlooks the possibility(16 more words not shown)
- Dfails to show(18 more words not shown)
- Eoverlooks the possibility(19 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Those are problems in democratic countries. Does that make them problems caused by democracy?
Olivia says contemporary democracies have corrected the flaws of the ancient Athenian system. Karl responds with crime, unemployment, and poverty today. I accept that those are serious social problems. But their existence doesn't by itself tell us what causes them, much less whether they result from the same defects Olivia says have been corrected.
Imagine a country with a well-designed voting system that still lacks enough resources to keep everyone out of poverty. The poverty could be real without showing a defect in how the political system operates. We'd need a connection between the social problem and the political defect Karl claims remains.
What we’re looking for
For the flaw question, I'd point to that unproved connection. We can challenge Karl without deciding that Olivia is right about every modern democracy. Karl's evidence simply needs more work before it supports his response.
Working the answers
- A
This is tempting because the same problems in nondemocratic countries might make them seem less specifically democratic. But a problem can have more than one cause, and different political systems can share defects. Crime could occur under both kinds of government while political defects still contribute to it in each. A doesn't directly identify the unsupported assumption Karl needs about the causes of the problems here.
- B
Karl offers examples, explicitly saying 'to name a few.' He doesn't need crime, unemployment, and poverty to be the only problems in either society. Other problems could exist without affecting the particular reasoning he offers, so an assumption of exclusivity isn't the flaw.
- C
Trying to reduce a problem doesn't establish that the problem is gone or that it isn't connected to a defect. A country could be addressing unemployment while unemployment remained common. The fact that efforts are underway doesn't answer whether Karl's examples show retained defects of the ancient system.
- D
Karl doesn't claim the current problems are worse. His claim is that defects remain. Even an improvement over ancient Athens could leave some of the same defects in place. He doesn't need to prove deterioration to make the claim he actually makes.
- ECorrect
Karl assumes that the social problems show defects in the political system, without establishing that those defects cause the problems. What if crime, poverty, and unemployment arise for reasons separate from the design of that system?
Then the problems could persist even if the ancient system's flaws had been corrected. E directly identifies the gap between Karl's evidence about social conditions and his conclusion about political defects. A only gives another place where the problems might occur; E addresses the needed causal connection itself.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.