LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 9032
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#27926
Complete Question Explanation

Point at Issue. The correct answer choice is (A)

In the dialogue presented in this stimulus, Constance states that the traditional definition of full employment is an unemployment rate of 5%, and that a rate lower than 5% will result in a rise in inflation.

Brigita claims that the traditional definition of full employment is no longer applicable because it was developed before the rise of temporary and part-time work and the fall in benefit levels. Because some people have to work several part-time jobs or work in a series of temporary assignments, Brigita argues, one cannot consider 5% unemployment to be full employment.

The question stem asks which of the answer choices reflects an issue on which the two speakers would disagree with one another. In prephrasing an answer, we should note that Constance and Brigita seem to disagree about what constitutes full employment. Constance believes that full employment is achieved when the unemployment rate is 5%; Brigita believes that this definition of full employment is outdated.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. This choice reflects the prephrased answer above, stating that Constance and Brigita disagree about what definition of full employment is applicable under present economic conditions.

Answer choice (B): The dialogue surrounds the applicability of the traditional definition of full employment, but Constance and Brigita do not get into a policy based argument about what level of unemployment is a “good idea,” so this answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): Since Constance never even mentions the proper categorization for a part time worker, there is no way to conclude that this would be a point of contention between the two speakers.

Answer choice (D): While this answer choice reflects Brigita’s assertion, Constance never weighs in on this issue, and because we cannot presume disagreement based on the information provided in the stimulus, this answer choice must be eliminated.

Answer choice (E): It is known that Constance believes that an unemployment rate below 5% will cause inflation to rise, but no assertion is made by either speaker regarding the effects of a higher unemployment rate on inflation.
User avatar
 Dancingbambarina
  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: Mar 30, 2024
|
#113372
In these POI questions, an AC like C can trip one up, even though it's not mentioned by one speaker. I find myself going back to the stimulus looking for any obscure assumptions made by the speaker who initially appears to not mention the point in the AC.
Are there instances where something isn't explicitly mentioned, but still something inferred the speaker meant / assumed so is taken as a point of contention?

Thank you
User avatar
 Dana D
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 479
  • Joined: Feb 06, 2024
|
#113426
Hey Dancing,

If an answer choice was properly inferred by what a speaker said, that might be correct for a point at issue, but if the speaker has not addressed the point at all, it's definitely not right because there is no evidence in the dialogue to say whether they support this idea or not. Here, we have no idea what Constance would think about part time workers, becasue he doesn't mention them at all, only Brigita does. Given that Constance only says one sentence and doesn't mention part time workers at all, we should easily be able to eliminate answer choice (C).

Hope that helps!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.