PrepTest 107, Section 4, Question 10
Parents should not necessarily raise their children in(31 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(11 more words not shown)
- AAlthough music theory(28 more words not shown)
- BOne need not(28 more words not shown)
- CIn deciding the(25 more words not shown)
- DA typical farmer(22 more words not shown)
- EUnlike society, one's(23 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Experts can disagree. One might recommend more reading, another more math, and another more unstructured play. So I can understand hesitating before treating every parenting recommendation as a command.
The passage's own reason is more specific: parents directly experience what succeeds with their children. Is experience enough to settle the best approach? A parent doesn't get to repeat the same childhood a thousand times and compare outcomes. Someone could also offer useful advice without having personally done the activity—learning to skate, shoot, and pass sounds sensible for hockey even to someone who has never played.
What we’re looking for
Those objections don't stop us from identifying the principle the author uses. The question asks for another case that conforms to it. My initial description would be: someone with direct experience may reasonably decline advice from experts. Keep both roles in view as we read—the person whose experience matters and the expert whose advice might be set aside.
Working the answers
- A
This contrasts musical theory with personal taste as a way to judge music. It doesn't compare an expert's general advice with a person's direct experience of the particular situation. Finding something interesting or useful isn't the same basis the parenting argument gives for setting advice aside.
- B
This does suggest ignoring experts, but for a different reason. The automotive experts are uninterested in practical factors that matter to an average buyer. That's a mismatch in concerns, not a comparison between general expertise and direct familiarity with a particular case. Merely recommending less attention to experts doesn't make the underlying principle the same.
- CCorrect
The climber knows this mountain, while the experts don't. That helps sharpen the parallel: the parents know their own children, while experts may know parenting generally without knowing those children.
The climber can therefore have a reason to set aside general expert advice about how to proceed here. It isn't a claim that all expertise is worthless or that the climber knows more about every mountain. The matching idea is that direct familiarity with a particular situation can matter more than general expertise in deciding what to do in that situation.
- D
This favors the trained expert over the person who does the work. The farmer is said to be less likely to know which soils are productive than the agricultural scientist. That runs against the original argument's use of direct experience as a reason not necessarily to follow experts.
- E
The reason for following one's conscience here is that it speaks with a single voice, unlike society. The parenting argument doesn't favor parents because they give one consistent message or reject experts because they represent many voices. E uses a different reason for choosing whose advice to follow.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.