PrepTest 143, Section 1, Question 14
If people refrained from being impolite to one(40 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(32 more words not shown)
- AIt is the(8 more words not shown)
- BIt is cited(11 more words not shown)
- CIt is cited(12 more words not shown)
- DIt is cited(15 more words not shown)
- EIt describes a(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
It would be nice if people were more polite. Does that mean the government should make them be polite?
Imagine someone smiling and greeting you at the grocery store because they want to. Now imagine the same greeting being required by law. It's reasonable to wonder what enforcing that requirement would involve. The author's stated concern is that enforcement would create more problems than impoliteness itself.
What we’re looking for
That reason supports the middle sentence: society wouldn't be better off with laws requiring politeness. The first sentence acknowledges the appeal of better behavior; the last explains why this particular way of pursuing it would be worse. Since the question asks about the middle claim's role, we're looking for the conclusion.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
This is the claim supported by the enforcement problem. Why wouldn't society be better off with politeness laws? Because enforcing them would cause even more problems than the behavior they're meant to prevent. That makes the targeted claim the argument's conclusion.
- B
The target isn't evidence offered for a further generalization. The argument ends by giving a reason to believe the target itself. B reverses that supporting relationship.
- C
This would require the target to support another assertion that then supports the conclusion. There is no such chain here. The enforcement-cost claim supports the target directly.
- D
The claim about politeness laws isn't an example illustrating a general premise. It is the judgment the author reaches about those laws. The passage gives a reason for that judgment rather than using it to illustrate something else.
- E
The author doesn't describe an observed phenomenon and then explain why it occurred. The author argues about whether a proposed law would improve society. The targeted claim is the conclusion of that evaluation.
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.