PrepTest 120, Section 1, Question 10
Editorial: Many observers note with dismay the decline(63 more words not shown)
The editorial undermines the conclusion(5 more words not shown)
- Ashowing that there(4 more words not shown)
- Boffering a counterexample(4 more words not shown)
- Cproving that no(10 more words not shown)
- Doffering an alternate(5 more words not shown)
- Eproving that governments(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Did government services push volunteers out, or did the government step in because volunteers were leaving?
The observers choose the first story. As government services grew, voluntary community organizations declined, so they blame the growth in services. I can think of other possibilities—perhaps technology changed how people spent their time—but the editorial develops one particular alternative: fewer volunteers may have left work for the government to do.
For example, a community group might stop providing a service, leaving residents with an unmet need. The government could then begin providing that service. We'd see more government involvement alongside less volunteering, just as the observers report, but the order of cause and effect would be the opposite of their explanation.
What we’re looking for
That's what “the latter may indeed cause the former” means here. The latter is the decrease in volunteerism; the former is the increase in government services. The editorial proposes that possibility without claiming to have proved it. For the question about its method, look for an alternative explanation of the same observed relationship.
Working the answers
- A
The editorial doesn't rule out a causal connection. It suggests that the decline in volunteering might cause the growth in government services. That's still a causal explanation, simply running in the other direction.
- B
A counterexample to the correlation would be a case that doesn't display the alleged relationship—for instance, a community where volunteering fell but government services didn't grow. The editorial doesn't give such a case. It leaves the reported relationship in place and questions what explains it.
- C
We haven't examined all possible generalizations about why people volunteer, much less proved that none can be drawn. The editorial questions one explanation for a decline in volunteering. That's far narrower than ruling out general claims about people's motives.
- DCorrect
Both accounts can explain why greater government services accompany less volunteering. The observers say government growth causes the decline; the editorial suggests the decline prompts government growth. Offering that second explanation challenges the confidence of the first without denying the observed correlation.
- E
Suggesting that government may have responded to a gap doesn't prove that it must fill every gap community organizations leave. The editorial offers a possible explanation of what happened, not an obligation or guarantee about what governments always have to do.
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.