PrepTest 135, Section 2, Question 5
Lahar: We must now settle on a procedure(46 more words not shown)
Lahar's argument does which one(3 more words not shown)
- Arejects suggested procedures(3 more words not shown)
- Bclaims that one(12 more words not shown)
- Csuggests a change(9 more words not shown)
- Drecommends a choice(7 more words not shown)
- Esupports one preference(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Three options. Two have problems. Lahar recommends the one left over.
Unanimous consent requires everyone to agree, and Lahar thinks that's unlikely. A committee might get the task done, but previous committees have produced factions and secret deals. Neither prospect is attractive. Majority voting remains as the third option allowed by the club's constitution.
What we’re looking for
Notice how the recommendation is supported. Lahar doesn't begin with a list of majority voting's advantages. The argument gets there by giving reasons to reject the other available methods. For the question about how the argument works, that's the description to look for: choose one option by eliminating its alternatives.
Working the answers
- A
All three procedures are allowed by the constitution. Lahar's objections are practical: unanimous agreement is unlikely, and committees have caused problems. A gets the basis for rejecting the alternatives wrong.
- B
The proposal concerns deciding meeting agendas. It doesn't claim that majority voting should settle every decision the club ever makes. A method suited to this task needn't be the right method for all other tasks.
- C
Lahar proposes using one of the constitution's existing options, not changing the constitution. The practical objections help select a permitted method; they aren't reasons offered for an amendment.
- DCorrect
Lahar starts with the three allowed choices, gives reasons to rule out unanimous consent and a committee, and recommends majority voting. The support comes from eliminating the alternatives rather than directly showing that majority voting has particular benefits.
- E
Criticizing a procedure isn't the same as criticizing the people who favor it. Lahar objects to the prospects and consequences of the alternatives. We hear no attack on their advocates' character, motives, or judgment.
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.