PrepTest 117, Section 3, Question 8
Rossi: It is undemocratic for people to live(108 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(5 more words not shown)
- AIt makes an(5 more words not shown)
- BIt denies the(5 more words not shown)
- CIt relies on(7 more words not shown)
- DIt substitutes description(7 more words not shown)
- EIt employs a(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Having a stake in a decision doesn't automatically make someone ready to make it. Rossi says children's interests deserve representation and may differ from their parents' interests. That gives us a reason to care about how government treats children. But does giving them the vote follow? We might still wonder whether very young children are prepared to assess complicated policy choices.
Smith develops that concern. First, Smith accepts that children's interests can differ, giving the example of deficits that affect the next generation's standard of living. Then Smith argues that children lack the understanding and perspective needed to take responsibility for voting. The disagreement is about what to do in response to their interests, not simply whether their interests matter.
What we’re looking for
This question asks us to describe Rossi's argument. So return to Rossi rather than describing Smith's objections. Rossi starts with a general rule about democracy: people shouldn't live under a government that doesn't represent their interests. Rossi then applies that rule to children as a reason to give them voting rights. That's the method we're looking for, whether or not we think the proposed policy is justified.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The general principle is that leaving people's interests unrepresented is undemocratic. Rossi applies it to children, whose interests may differ from their parents', and uses it to support giving children the vote. Identifying that method doesn't require us to agree that voting is the right way to address the concern.
- B
Rossi doesn't accuse an opponent of dishonesty or bad motives. Saying something like opponents only want to hurt children would question their good faith. Rossi instead gives a reason based on representation and children's interests.
- C
Rossi doesn't predict what children would vote for or what policies their votes would produce. That would be a discussion of the proposal's consequences. Here the support is a principle about democratic representation, followed by a claim that children's interests fit the concern that principle raises.
- D
Rossi does give a rationale for the policy: children's interests can differ from their parents', and leaving interests unrepresented is undemocratic. We may question whether that reasoning is sufficient, but an unconvincing rationale would still be a rationale. D wrongly describes the argument as substituting mere description for reasons.
- E
No single term is used twice with different meanings. Children are people; applying a principle about people to children isn't itself a change in a word's meaning. The question is whether the stated concern justifies giving them voting rights, not whether Rossi has used a term in two different senses.
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.