PrepTest 127, Section 2, Question 2
Denise: Crime will be reduced only when punishment(58 more words not shown)
Their dialogue provides the most(10 more words not shown)
- Apeople are capable(8 more words not shown)
- Bcrime is the(6 more words not shown)
- Creducing crime requires(7 more words not shown)
- Dcrimes are committed(5 more words not shown)
- Ereducing crime requires(4 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Denise makes a strong claim: crime will be reduced only when punishment is certain and severe enough to deter someone considering a crime. That makes punishment a requirement in her account. She hasn't said that imposing those punishments automatically guarantees a reduction.
Is punishment really required? Perhaps education could give people another way to improve their lives. That is the alternative Reshmi offers. She wants educational opportunities readily available so people who once saw crime as their only route to a comfortable life can choose another path.
What we’re looking for
The disagreement is easy to see: they favor different approaches to reducing crime. But the question asks where they agree. That changes what we should look for. Both treat crime reduction as possible, even though they differ about how to achieve it. Let's find something supported by each speaker, rather than pick a statement merely because one of them says it.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Both accounts depend on people being able to choose. Denise describes someone considering a crime and deciding against it because of the punishment. Reshmi describes someone choosing a different path after gaining educational opportunities. Their proposed influences differ, but both allow people to decide whether to commit crimes.
- B
Neither ranks crime against other social problems. They can discuss reducing crime while believing education, taxes, or another issue is more important. The topic of their conversation doesn't establish that it is their highest priority.
- C
Be careful with 'fair and consistent.' Denise calls for certain and sufficiently severe punishment, but that doesn't establish that the responses must be fair. Two people might both face certain punishment and receive very different penalties. Reshmi advocates educational opportunities; she doesn't say that reducing crime requires fair and consistent responses to criminal behavior. We cannot add those qualifications to create an agreement.
- D
Reshmi identifies people whose criminal activity is connected to securing a comfortable lifestyle. Denise says nothing about what motivates people to commit crimes. Her proposal could apply to crimes driven by money, anger, or something else, so economic need isn't an established point of agreement.
- E
Assured punishment is central to Denise's proposal. Reshmi instead directs attention to education. Whatever other views Reshmi might hold about punishment, this exchange doesn't support attributing Denise's requirement to her.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.