PrepTest 158, Section 3, Question 23
According to rational-choice theory, popular support for various(58 more words not shown)
It can be properly inferred(9 more words not shown)
- Aeconomically motivated decisions(8 more words not shown)
- Ba complex phenomenon(6 more words not shown)
- Cpolitical phenomena often(10 more words not shown)
- Dpopular support for(7 more words not shown)
- Ethe decisions of(19 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Do people choose a party just because they think its policies will leave them better off financially?
That's the explanation rational-choice theory offers here. Tax advantages or financial benefits could influence a voter. But I might wonder whether principles or other concerns also matter. The sociologists make a different objection: the rise of a political organization is complex, and they say a simple phenomenon can't cause something that complex.
What we’re looking for
We could question that objection too. Does a complex outcome always need a complex cause? But the question isn't asking which side has the better theory. It asks what these sociologists must believe. We need to connect their stated rule about simple and complex phenomena to the particular explanation they reject, without importing our own guesses about what motivates voters.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The sociologists must regard the economically motivated decisions in this explanation as something that needn't be complex. Otherwise, their objection wouldn't reach rational-choice theory.
Try treating those decisions as complex instead. Then we would have a complex phenomenon—the rise of a political organization—explained by another complex phenomenon. The sociologists' rule against simple causes wouldn't object to that. For their stated criticism to work, they must place the proposed economic explanation on the simple side of the distinction. A captures that commitment.
- B
Why many causes? The sociologists require complexity in the cause, but they don't say a complex phenomenon needs multiple complex causes. One complex cause could satisfy their objection. B adds a claim about the number of causes that the passage doesn't provide.
- C
Religious and cultural factors might be plausible alternatives, but the sociologists don't identify them. We shouldn't fill in their theory for them just because those influences seem reasonable to us. The passage establishes their objection to a simple explanation, not a list of the other causes they accept.
- D
The sociologists expressly treat the rise of a political organization as a complex phenomenon. D says popular support for political parties is never complex, which goes against the very basis of their objection. They reject the proposed simple cause because of the outcome's complexity.
- E
Rejecting economic advantage as a sufficient explanation doesn't mean voters are usually uninfluenced by it. The sociologists could think voters routinely consider their finances while also thinking that this fails to explain the broader political development fully.
E removes the usual influence altogether. The passage questions whether that influence provides the needed explanation. Those are different claims, and only the second is part of the dispute described.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.