PrepTest 125, Section 4, Question 15
Singletary: We of Citizens for Cycling Freedom object(61 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(16 more words not shown)
- AIt is cited(16 more words not shown)
- BIt is used(12 more words not shown)
- CIt is offered(10 more words not shown)
- DIt is offered(14 more words not shown)
- EIt is presented(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why couldn't the city require helmets and also build bike lanes?
Singletary treats the helmet ordinance as evidence that the city cares about looking concerned rather than protecting cyclists. But the passage doesn't establish that bike lanes and driver education are being ignored. Those measures might be happening too. And even if they aren't, what if the helmet rule is a useful first step while the city works out how to fund a larger project?
More ambitious measures could require more money and time. Choosing an easier measure first wouldn't by itself establish an insincere motive. We can question Singletary's accusation without needing to decide the best bicycle-safety policy.
What we’re looking for
Now the question asks about the role of the statement mentioning driver education. Start with the conclusion: the city cares more about the appearance of safety than actual safety. The driver-education statement describes what Singletary thinks a city genuinely focused on safety would do instead. It's part of the support for the accusation about the city's priorities, even if that support doesn't convince us.
Working the answers
- A
Misunderstanding safety is different from having the wrong priority. Singletary doesn't conclude that the city is confused about which measures would help. The accusation is that the city cares more about appearances. Officials could understand the options perfectly and still have the motive Singletary attributes to them.
- BCorrect
The statement helps support a claim about the city's motivation: what it really cares about. Singletary presents bike lanes and driver education as what a safety-focused city would pursue, then contrasts that with the helmet ordinance to accuse the city of caring more about appearances. 'Partial support' fits because this statement works with the rest of the reasoning; it doesn't have to establish the conclusion by itself.
- C
The existence of other possible safety measures doesn't establish that the helmet ordinance is totally ineffective. The statement is being used to question the city's priorities. It isn't a demonstration that requiring helmets provides no benefit whatsoever.
- D
The statement says what the city would do if it wanted to make cycling safer. It doesn't announce what the city will actually do next. A proposed alternative cannot be turned into a forecast that the city has adopted it.
- E
Bike lanes and driver education are not presented as examples of the city's image-building behavior. They are the alternatives Singletary associates with a real interest in safety. The helmet ordinance is the action used to support the accusation about appearances. E assigns that role to the wrong statement.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.