PrepTest 109, Section 3, Question 19
Raphaela: Forcing people to help others is morally(42 more words not shown)
Raphaela and Edward disagree about(8 more words not shown)
- AAny government that(13 more words not shown)
- BAny government that(10 more words not shown)
- CEvery government should(6 more words not shown)
- DAny government that(9 more words not shown)
- EAny government that(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Edward gives an exception to Raphaela's blanket rejection.
Raphaela says no government has the right to redistribute resources through taxation. Her reason treats that redistribution as forcing people to help others, which she considers wrong. Keep the purpose specific: she is discussing taxes used to redistribute resources, not declaring every possible tax illegitimate.
She also points to voluntary help. People being able to give voluntarily doesn't tell us whether they will give, but we don't need to decide whether charity would supply enough resources to find this disagreement.
Edward says the government can redistribute through taxation if people are free to leave its authority. His answer is effectively, “You may leave, but while you stay, the government has this right.” Raphaela's no-government rule still rules it out in that situation.
What we’re looking for
So I'd test the case where leaving is permitted. Does that government have the right to redistribute through taxation? Edward says yes. Raphaela says no. That is the clear conflict to look for in the choices.
Working the answers
- A
This concerns a government that does not let people leave. Raphaela would reject its right to redistribute, since she rejects that right for every government. Edward's defense concerns governments that do permit departure; he doesn't offer an opposing defense of the government A describes. This doesn't give us their clear disagreement.
- BCorrect
Permitting emigration means allowing people to leave. Edward says that permission gives the government the right to redistribute resources through taxation. Raphaela says no government has that right, so allowing departure doesn't create an exception under her position. The same proposed policy receives a yes from Edward and a no from Raphaela.
- C
Raphaela points to voluntary help as an available alternative. Edward doesn't address what all governments should allow people to do voluntarily. His comment concerns a right to redistribute through taxation. We aren't given opposing positions on private voluntary help.
- D
Raphaela's reasoning treats redistribution through taxation as forced help. Edward focuses on whether a government has the right to do it when people may leave. He doesn't clearly take the opposite position on whether to call the action forcing people to help. A disagreement about permission isn't automatically a disagreement about that description.
- E
Raphaela doesn't offer a rule saying that a government forcing help should allow emigration. She rejects the right to redistribute through taxation altogether. We can't turn that rejection into an endorsement of a proposed condition for such governments. B instead asks about the case on which both speakers give a clear answer.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.