PrepTest 111, Section 3, Question 10
Goswami: I support the striking workers at Ergon(37 more words not shown)
Goswami and Nordecki disagree over(9 more words not shown)
- AThe average annual(7 more words not shown)
- BPay is the(11 more words not shown)
- CIt is reasonable(7 more words not shown)
- DThe striking workers(5 more words not shown)
- EIt was unreasonable(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
An average over $29,000 could coexist with most workers making less than $20,000. A few high salaries can pull an average up. For a small illustration, imagine three striking workers earning $19,000, $19,000, and $52,000. Their average is $30,000, yet two of the three make less than $20,000. Those aren't the actual workers' salaries; they show why the two speakers' figures needn't conflict.
So I'm skeptical of Nordecki's response. The average doesn't automatically refute Goswami's concern about what most workers earn. We'd want to know whether a few better-paid workers are making that number unrepresentative of the majority.
What we’re looking for
But the question asks what the speakers disagree about, not whose evidence is stronger. Goswami explicitly says the striking workers are underpaid and supports them for that reason. Nordecki challenges that judgment by citing the average salary. Whether that is a persuasive challenge is separate from identifying the point being challenged: are these striking workers underpaid?
Working the answers
- A
Goswami doesn't give an average and needn't dispute Nordecki's number. As the example shows, a high average and a majority below $20,000 can both be true. A also refers to salaries at the company generally, while Nordecki's figure specifically concerns the striking workers. The stated disagreement is about whether those workers are underpaid.
- B
Nordecki says if pay is the issue, there is a disagreement. That doesn't deny that pay is the main issue in the strike. The response challenges the claim that the workers' pay warrants Goswami's support, not a factual claim about what motivated the strike.
- C
Nordecki could agree that genuinely underpaid striking workers deserve support while denying that these workers are underpaid. We need to separate the general principle from whether this group qualifies under it. The speakers conflict over the latter.
- DCorrect
Goswami says the workers are underpaid. Nordecki responds that, on the pay issue, Goswami is wrong and offers the higher average as the reason. That gives us opposite positions on whether these workers are underpaid, even if Nordecki's use of the average is unconvincing.
- E
Nordecki doesn't give an overall verdict on whether going on strike was unreasonable. Other issues could justify the strike even if Nordecki thinks the pay is adequate. The qualified disagreement about pay doesn't establish opposition to the strike for every possible reason.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.