PrepTest 155, Section 4, Question 4
Leona: Thompson's article on the novel Emily's Trials(73 more words not shown)
The argumentative strategy Leona uses(13 more words not shown)
- Asome of Thompson's(3 more words not shown)
- BThompson provides no(8 more words not shown)
- Cthe analysis of(11 more words not shown)
- Dit is unlikely(9 more words not shown)
- Esome of Thompson's(4 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why can't someone act and still feel anxious about it? At first, Leona's complaint seems puzzling. Thompson describes a character as experiencing inner turmoil and also as a 'self-identified agent' of an action. I can imagine doing something while worrying about whether it was morally right. Simply placing an action and some anxiety in the same scene doesn't strike me as a contradiction.
But then we get the crucial detail: Thompson himself says that a self-identified agent cannot have misgivings or anxiety. Now Leona's objection makes sense. She isn't asking us to assume that acting and feeling anxious are incompatible. She's holding Thompson to the restriction he announced at the beginning of his article.
What we’re looking for
He says someone cannot be both things, then describes the same character in the same scene as being both. Those claims cannot all be true together. The strategy question asks us to identify this criticism: Thompson's account contradicts itself.
Working the answers
- A
Circular reasoning would use the claim being defended as its own support. That's different from making claims that conflict with each other. Leona points to a rule Thompson gives and a description that violates that rule; she doesn't accuse him of merely repeating a claim as its justification.
- B
We may still want a fuller definition of 'self-identified agent,' but that isn't Leona's criticism. She uses the restriction Thompson does provide: such an agent cannot experience anxiety. She then points to a character Thompson describes in ways that violate that restriction. A missing definition isn't needed to explain her objection.
- C
This would criticize Thompson for not providing enough evidence from Emily's Trials to support his reading of the character. Leona instead compares his claims with one another. Even if the novel offered plenty of support for the character's anxiety, Thompson would still have a problem calling that character someone he says cannot feel anxiety.
- D
Leona doesn't argue that no character is likely to qualify as a self-identified agent. The category could have plenty of members, and her objection would remain: Thompson places this anxious character in a category that, by his own account, excludes anxiety.
- ECorrect
Thompson claims that self-identified agents cannot have anxiety, that this character is such an agent, and that this character has anxiety in the same scene. The first two claims rule out what the third one asserts. Leona exposes that conflict within Thompson's own account.
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.