PrepTest 145, Section 2, Question 15
Political leader: In this political dispute, our side(44 more words not shown)
The conclusion of the political(12 more words not shown)
- AThe political leader's(9 more words not shown)
- BThe opposition is(9 more words not shown)
- CThe political leader's(8 more words not shown)
- DThe opposition would(7 more words not shown)
- EThe opposition will(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What if the compromise is bad for our side?
The leader presents this as a win either way. Show a desire to compromise, and the opposition has two possible responses. If it refuses, it gets blamed for the failure, and the passage explicitly says our side benefits. That branch is covered.
If the opposition responds positively, however, all we're told is that a compromise will be reached. Perhaps that compromise is helpful. But perhaps it gives away something our side badly needs. Reaching an agreement isn't automatically a benefit to the people making it.
What we’re looking for
The question asks us to make the conclusion follow. Complete the other branch: our side benefits if a compromise is reached. Then showing a desire to compromise produces a benefit whether the opposition responds positively or refuses.
Working the answers
- A
Actually wanting a compromise and benefiting from showing a willingness to compromise aren't the same thing. The leader's side might dislike negotiating and still benefit from the result or from the other side's refusal. A doesn't establish that a reached compromise is beneficial.
- B
Even if the opposition rarely agrees, we still need to know what happens on the occasions when it does. Frequency doesn't fill the missing connection between reaching a compromise and benefiting our side. The refusal branch already provides a benefit.
- CCorrect
If a compromise is reached, the leader's side benefits. Now test both possible responses. A positive response leads to a compromise, which benefits our side under C. A negative response leads to blame for the opposition and a benefit to our side under the stated premise.
Those two cases cover the opposition's responses, so the claimed benefit follows. We aren't assuming that the opposition actually will agree; we're making sure our side benefits if it does.
- D
The opposition's benefit doesn't settle whether our side benefits. Both sides could benefit from an agreement, or one could benefit at the other's expense. We need a connection to the leader's own side, not a claim about the opposition's incentives.
- E
This guarantees that a compromise will happen, but it leaves the important question untouched: is that compromise good for our side? If the agreement is harmful, making it certain won't establish the promised benefit. C addresses the value of the result rather than merely its occurrence.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.