PrepTest 159, Section 1, Question 11
Ross: Many governments have attempted to regulate strictly(69 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(7 more words not shown)
- AFew governments are(10 more words not shown)
- BEven when completely(10 more words not shown)
- CSome dramatists criticize(11 more words not shown)
- DMost theatrical productions(6 more words not shown)
- EThe public generally(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If you can't silence the theater, hire the people making it. That's Ross's proposed solution to a government control problem.
I can follow the concern about outright bans. People still want entertainment, and writers can criticize the authorities indirectly. A play doesn't have to name an official to make the audience recognize the target. So banning or tightly regulating theater may fail to eliminate the criticism.
Now accept Ross's claim that honored government employees won't criticize the government. Does hiring the existing dramatists solve the whole problem? What if other people start writing and performing plays? Hiring one group doesn't necessarily eliminate the public demand that another group could fill.
What we’re looking for
That's my first thought for a weakener: replacement performers might keep the criticism alive. But Ross makes a two-part promise—control theater and satisfy the public. Evidence undermining either part could challenge the proposed strategy.
Working the answers
- A
A government might be unwilling to pay for a strategy that would work. Ross argues that the strategy is effective, not that most governments are willing to adopt it. The answer gives us an obstacle to getting governments to try the plan without showing that the plan fails when used.
- B
Criticism need not overthrow a government to be something officials want to control. More importantly, B doesn't tell us what happens when the government hires dramatists and performers. The overall rarity of overthrow doesn't show that this particular strategy fails to control theater or satisfy its audience.
- C
Not being treated harshly is different from being an honored government employee. The passage says the latter status prevents criticism. A dramatist who receives no harsh treatment but remains independent could criticize the government without contradicting the premise supporting Ross's plan.
- D
Most productions might be politically neutral while the remaining productions still concern the government. We need to assess the strategy for controlling theater and satisfying the public, not establish that every play currently criticizes the authorities. D leaves that assessment unresolved.
- ECorrect
The public generally dislikes productions written or performed by government employees. That directly undermines Ross's promise to satisfy the public by turning dramatists and performers into those employees.
It also helps explain why I worried about an audience for independent replacements: people may still want something different. But we don't have to prove that new critics will appear or that the government will lose power. The answer already attacks one of the strategy's stated goals.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.