PrepTest 102, Section 4, Question 21
Sarah: Some schools seek to foster a habit(100 more words not shown)
Paul responds to Sarah's argument(8 more words not shown)
- AHe argues that(10 more words not shown)
- BHe argues that(19 more words not shown)
- CHe introduces considerations(8 more words not shown)
- DHe questions Sarah's(9 more words not shown)
- EHe argues that(17 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Making students perform service could go either way. Some might resent it, finish the required hours, and never return. Others might enjoy the experience and want to do it again.
Sarah correctly distinguishes doing something voluntarily from doing it because the school requires it. The initial required service isn't volunteering. But her conclusion is broader: this policy cannot, by itself, develop a habit of volunteering. The distinction about the initial act needs to establish something about the policy's eventual effect.
Paul brings in students who enjoyed their required service and later chose similar service for themselves. The first act can remain compulsory while the later act is voluntary. We don't have to rename the initial service to recognize that the experience might influence a later choice.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for Paul's argumentative technique. My rough prediction is that he challenges Sarah by introducing cases in which the policy has the result she rules out. Look for a description of what that evidence does to her reasoning, rather than just a description of which speaker favors the policy.
Working the answers
- A
Paul doesn't accuse Sarah of using her conclusion as its own support. He gives information about what some students do after their compulsory service. That evidence challenges her inference about what the policy can achieve, not whether she has merely repeated herself.
- B
Paul doesn't need to call the compulsory service genuine volunteering. His examples involve later activities that the students actually choose to do. Both speakers can agree that forced service isn't volunteering while disagreeing about whether it can lead to volunteering. B confuses a dispute over how a habit develops with a dispute over classifying the original act.
- CCorrect
Sarah assumes that because the required activity is not itself voluntary, the policy cannot by itself develop a volunteering habit. Paul introduces the possibility she overlooks: the required experience can lead students to choose further service. His cases call that assumption into question.
The policy needn't succeed with every student for this response to matter. Sarah rules out its succeeding by itself at all; Paul identifies cases in which the enjoyment of the required experience leads to the desired voluntary behavior.
- D
Paul says nothing about why Sarah opposes the policy. He doesn't accuse her of disliking the students or having a hidden agenda. He addresses the effect she says the policy cannot produce.
- E
Paul defends the same policy Sarah criticizes. He doesn't propose a second policy, such as rewarding students for voluntary hours. The dispute concerns whether the existing requirement can develop the habit, not which alternative program would work better.
More Strategy of Argument questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strategy of Argument questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.