- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8917
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Tue May 17, 2016 10:44 am
#24960
Complete Question Explanation
Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (B)
In this stimulus, we explore the difference between equality and uniformity. The political scientist begins the argument by introducing an anti-conclusion. An anti-conclusion is a common argument technique found on the LSAT that allows the author to present a view that is in opposition to his or her own. In this case, the anti-conclusion is the idea that total equality would force people into a common mold. How do we recognize that this is an anti-conclusion rather than a view with which the author would agree? The political scientist calls the view wrong. The key is to look for language that distances the speaker from the opposing viewpoint with words like “wrong,” “mistaken,” or “incorrect.”
Continuing through the argument, we understand that some people believe that totally equality will necessarily lead to a bland uniformity. As explained above, this is not the author’s belief. The political scientist argues that by promoting complementary human interests, an egalitarian society can enhance diversity. This is in direct opposition to those who believe that equality is equivalent to uniformity.
Answer choice (A): This answer choice is incorrect as the stimulus does not focus on the results accepting the view that equality requires uniformity. The author does not present a list of consequences that will result from accepting that view. In fact, we have no information about the consequences of accepting either view. As in any first family question, if the stimulus does not contain information to support an answer choice, it cannot be correct.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. In the stimulus, the argument is structured as an attack. The author is attacking the underlying premise of his opposition—that equality is equivalent to uniformity. The political scientist identifies the assumption by using the word “presumed.” The author then attacks it by stating that under certain conditions, equality can enhance diversity, and therefore, cannot be equivalent to uniformity. In this way, he or she rebuts the objection to egalitarianism by undermining the assumption that equality must equal sameness.
Answer choice (C): The author does not attack those who support the opposing viewpoint. The political scientist does not give any information about those who disagree with him or her. We cannot say it would be in their self-interest to oppose egalitarianism, as we do not know who the opponents are, or what characteristics they have that would lead them to benefit from a less egalitarian society.
Answer choice (D): This answer choice is incorrect as the author is not concerned about group dynamics. The view against which the author argues is not stating that an egalitarian society must be composed of only egalitarian people, but that an egalitarian society would force the members to all fit into a mold.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice is incorrect as we have no counterexample in the stimulus. The author does not argue against the view that egalitarianism is equivalent to sameness by providing a specific example where egalitarianism did not lead to a uniform society. Instead, the political scientist provides a condition where egalitarianism would lead to diversity, where egalitarianism is achieved by encouraging complementary human interests.
Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (B)
In this stimulus, we explore the difference between equality and uniformity. The political scientist begins the argument by introducing an anti-conclusion. An anti-conclusion is a common argument technique found on the LSAT that allows the author to present a view that is in opposition to his or her own. In this case, the anti-conclusion is the idea that total equality would force people into a common mold. How do we recognize that this is an anti-conclusion rather than a view with which the author would agree? The political scientist calls the view wrong. The key is to look for language that distances the speaker from the opposing viewpoint with words like “wrong,” “mistaken,” or “incorrect.”
Continuing through the argument, we understand that some people believe that totally equality will necessarily lead to a bland uniformity. As explained above, this is not the author’s belief. The political scientist argues that by promoting complementary human interests, an egalitarian society can enhance diversity. This is in direct opposition to those who believe that equality is equivalent to uniformity.
Answer choice (A): This answer choice is incorrect as the stimulus does not focus on the results accepting the view that equality requires uniformity. The author does not present a list of consequences that will result from accepting that view. In fact, we have no information about the consequences of accepting either view. As in any first family question, if the stimulus does not contain information to support an answer choice, it cannot be correct.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. In the stimulus, the argument is structured as an attack. The author is attacking the underlying premise of his opposition—that equality is equivalent to uniformity. The political scientist identifies the assumption by using the word “presumed.” The author then attacks it by stating that under certain conditions, equality can enhance diversity, and therefore, cannot be equivalent to uniformity. In this way, he or she rebuts the objection to egalitarianism by undermining the assumption that equality must equal sameness.
Answer choice (C): The author does not attack those who support the opposing viewpoint. The political scientist does not give any information about those who disagree with him or her. We cannot say it would be in their self-interest to oppose egalitarianism, as we do not know who the opponents are, or what characteristics they have that would lead them to benefit from a less egalitarian society.
Answer choice (D): This answer choice is incorrect as the author is not concerned about group dynamics. The view against which the author argues is not stating that an egalitarian society must be composed of only egalitarian people, but that an egalitarian society would force the members to all fit into a mold.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice is incorrect as we have no counterexample in the stimulus. The author does not argue against the view that egalitarianism is equivalent to sameness by providing a specific example where egalitarianism did not lead to a uniform society. Instead, the political scientist provides a condition where egalitarianism would lead to diversity, where egalitarianism is achieved by encouraging complementary human interests.