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: 8927
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#60936
Complete Question Explanation

Must Be True—Principle. The correct answer choice is (A)

In this stimulus, we are told that lawyers will sometimes employ authorities with less expertise, simply because these people sound more convincing in court. Since we are asked to choose a scenario that most closely conforms to the reflected principle, we can apply the test of abstraction. We might abstract as follows: “In some cases, persuasiveness can be more important than knowledge as a criterion for selection.”

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Some politicians win on the basis of public perception; they can run a persuasive campaign, without necessarily having particular expertise with regard to political issues. This is a case in which persuasiveness is more important than knowledge.

Answer choice (B): This response might appear slightly attractive, because it involves persuasiveness. It is not perfectly analogous, however because it doesn’t involve a contrast to any other criterion.

Answer choice (C): This choice is an Opposite answer, because it involves selection on the basis of the merit of a singer’s voice, and recommends that public perception be ignored. This principle is contrary to the one reflected in the stimulus.

Answer choice (D): The stimulus does not concern coercion, with or without reinforcement, nor does the stimulus prescribe any particular course of action, so this choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice provides that companies generally try to fit the person to the job rather than vice versa. This is different from the principle reflected in the stimulus, which is more focused on selection criteria.
User avatar
 queenbee
  • Posts: 75
  • Joined: Sep 18, 2022
|
#97351
Hi
Any chance you can help me understand why my reasoning was wrong?

The the question stem/stimulus, 2 different expertise levels are discussed
The expert who can deliver presentations extremely well
We have a lesser expert who doesnt do so well with presentations but is great with speaking
So I took this as 2 different skill levels where the speaker was needed in a situation if a testimony is given

in C, we also have 2 different skill levels:
the opera singer with the best voice
the opera singer with a lesser voice but better dramatics
the opera singer with the lesser voice was was considered less ideal because dramatics were more important

I didnt select A because we were only dealing with a single politician and not comparing 2 different skill levels.

Would you please help me understand why this logic is incorrect?
Thank you!
 Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1774
  • Joined: Dec 06, 2013
|
#97403
queenbee,

The problem with your analysis is that the expert with the best presentation skills is the expert great at speaking. These are the same skills. Experts with these skills are contrasted with experts who have more knowledge but less ability to persuade.

In answer choice (C), we have the better singer vs. the more audience-affecting singer. In terms of the stimulus, this would be exactly like the difference between a knowledgeable expert and a more persuasive expert. Answer choice (C) choices the best voice - like choosing the highly knowledgeable expert. That's the opposite of what the stimulus does - the stimulus wants the one with better presentation skills even if they're not as "expert" an expert.

Robert Carroll

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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