PrepTest 105, Section 2, Question 13
Yolanda: Gaining access to computers without authorization and(80 more words not shown)
An issue in dispute between(4 more words not shown)
- Awhether joyriding physically(3 more words not shown)
- Bwhether the unauthorized(9 more words not shown)
- Cwhether damage to(10 more words not shown)
- Dwhether the unauthorized(11 more words not shown)
- Ewhether treating private(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Both acts involve taking control of someone else's property and using it recklessly. I can see why Yolanda compares unauthorized computer use with joyriding. But is computer damage safely confined to the computer?
Yolanda says joyriding is more dangerous because it physically threatens people, while computer crimes harm only intellectual property. I can imagine serious consequences from manipulating or exposing someone's data, even before Arjun gives his example.
His hospital example makes the physical stakes clearer. If damaged records interfere with care that a patient's life depends on, the effects need not remain inside a data system. Arjun uses that possibility to challenge Yolanda's dismissal of computer crime as less dangerous to people.
What we’re looking for
We're asked what is in dispute. The central comparison is the danger to people from computer crime versus joyriding. Yolanda puts joyriding above computer crime; Arjun rejects the basis for that ranking. Look for the comparative danger, rather than a different question about whether either act is a crime.
Working the answers
- A
Arjun doesn't deny that joyriding endangers people. His point is that computer crimes can threaten people too. The disagreement concerns the comparison with computer crimes, not whether joyriding poses any physical danger.
- B
Yolanda already says both acts involve private property, and Arjun's response describes damage to data systems. He adds a possible effect on human beings; he doesn't deny the property damage. That is not their point of conflict.
- C
How criminal an act is and how dangerous it is are different questions. Neither speaker develops a ranking based on legal punishment or degree of criminality. Their dispute concerns harm to people, so this substitutes a different comparison.
- DCorrect
Yolanda says unauthorized computer use is less dangerous to people than joyriding. Arjun objects that computer misuse can threaten lives too, using hospital records as his example. The exchange therefore disputes whether computer crime can be as dangerous to people as joyriding.
Identifying that dispute doesn't require accepting Arjun's argument as a complete proof that the risks are equal. He is challenging Yolanda's ranking and her reason for it. We should not turn his response into a claim that every computer crime is worse than every instance of joyriding.
- E
Both speakers allow that reckless treatment of private property can be dangerous. Yolanda's joyriding example makes that clear, and Arjun supplies a computer example. They disagree about the relative danger of the two activities, not whether reckless property misuse is ever dangerous.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.