#5 - Many scholars believe that official medieval

[Chrismen30]

This is from the second logical reasoning section from the Feb. 96 Lsat.
It should begin as so:

"Many scholars believe that official medieval persecutions..."

So the stimulus presents a belief that many scholars believe, and their reasons for believing it. Author then questions their explanation for their belief, presents some evidence to support h/er/is conclusion, "highly questionable."

I got question 4 correct. Yay!

5 though...
So for this question we are trying to strengthen the author's position. I chose (B), why? well because I thought protection=we friends I love you!!! (exaggerating because this just got real with 9 more days till Dday) O wow. Anyhow now I realized (B) is way off. Why? because that would not make the scholars belief questionable, at most it supports the scholars belief. Please correct me if I am wrong.

On the other hand, I couldn't even grasp why (A) is right. I think its because I did not understand the stimulus.
The two reasons why the Author thinks scholars belief is questionable:
1) Coming to think about it. The language in this sentence throws me off. (Lines 5-8)
But here's a try, I think its that the most violent and sustained persecutions were not hostile to the group being persecuted.
2) The most serious and widespread are those who argued the official's right to govern.
So authorities are not reluctant.

With all this being said, I think I am coming to realize why (A) is right.
Those that disputed official's right to govern is a minority group.
This idea paired with (A), which is the idea that: Official persecutions...usually preceded by...vilifying...groups...persecuted.
Makes us rethink whether officials were really reluctant after all, since if they were why would they vilify the groups being persecuted.

Well thats all folks of powerscore, I hope I am not too off. And I want to thank you now for helping me out.

[David Boyle]

This is from the second logical reasoning section from the Feb. 96 Lsat.
It should begin as so:

"Many scholars believe that official medieval persecutions..."

So the stimulus presents a belief that many scholars believe, and their reasons for believing it. Author then questions their explanation for their belief, presents some evidence to support h/er/is conclusion, "highly questionable."

I got question 4 correct. Yay!

5 though...
So for this question we are trying to strengthen the author's position. I chose (B), why? well because I thought protection=we friends I love you!!! (exaggerating because this just got real with 9 more days till Dday) O wow. Anyhow now I realized (B) is way off. Why? because that would not make the scholars belief questionable, at most it supports the scholars belief. Please correct me if I am wrong.

On the other hand, I couldn't even grasp why (A) is right. I think its because I did not understand the stimulus.
The two reasons why the Author thinks scholars belief is questionable:
1) Coming to think about it. The language in this sentence throws me off. (Lines 5-8)
But here's a try, I think its that the most violent and sustained persecutions were not hostile to the group being persecuted.
2) The most serious and widespread are those who argued the official's right to govern.
So authorities are not reluctant.

With all this being said, I think I am coming to realize why (A) is right.
Those that disputed official's right to govern is a minority group.
This idea paired with (A), which is the idea that: Official persecutions...usually preceded by...vilifying...groups...persecuted.
Makes us rethink whether officials were really reluctant after all, since if they were why would they vilify the groups being persecuted.

Well thats all folks of powerscore, I hope I am not too off. And I want to thank you now for helping me out.

Hello Chrismen 30,

Yes, answer B may actually support the scholars' belief, as answer B makes the authorities seem fairly benevolent, rather than malevolent.

By contrast, answer A rather takes care of the "wrath of the people" argument that the scholars use, since answer A shows that it was the authorities who were whipping up the wrath of the people in a manipulative way, rather than any hatred that the people had thought of themselves.

Hope this helps,
David

[saiffshaikhh@gmail.com]

Not sure how A is right as opposed to C ?

[Amber Thomas]

Hi Saiffshaikhh!

Let's break down our stimulus:

Premise 1: Many scholars believe that medieval persecutions of minority groups were only taken on to soothe unrest caused by underlying popular hostility towards these groups.
Premise 2: However, there is little indication that there was popular hostility towards heavily persecuted groups.
Premise 3: Also, the most serious persecutions targeted groups that effectively disputed authorities' right to govern.
Conclusion: Therefore, scholars' belief that medieval persecutions of minority groups were in part due to underlying popular hostility is questionable.

We're looking for an Answer Choice that supports our conclusion that the scholars' belief is wrong.

Answer Choice C states: "some groups, such as those accused of witchcraft, were the victims of spontaneous mob violence as well as of occasional official persecution."

This would actually weaken our conclusion! If persecuted groups, such as those accused of witchcraft, were the subject of popular hostility, and thus mob violence, that would strengthen the scholars' belief that persecution from authorities is due to popular hostility.

Answer Choice A states: "official persecutions in medieval times were usually preceded by officially sanctioned propaganda campaigns vilifying the groups to be persecuted."

This supports our conclusion, because it demonstrates that any popular hostility may actually be a result of medieval authorities' persecution and propaganda, as opposed to a pre-existing unrest.

I hope this helps!

[saiffshaikhh@gmail.com]

Hi Saiffshaikhh!

Let's break down our stimulus:

Premise 1: Many scholars believe that medieval persecutions of minority groups were only taken on to soothe unrest caused by underlying popular hostility towards these groups.
Premise 2: However, there is little indication that there was popular hostility towards heavily persecuted groups.
Premise 3: Also, the most serious persecutions targeted groups that effectively disputed authorities' right to govern.
Conclusion: Therefore, scholars' belief that medieval persecutions of minority groups were in part due to underlying popular hostility is questionable.

We're looking for an Answer Choice that supports our conclusion that the scholars' belief is wrong.

Answer Choice C states: "some groups, such as those accused of witchcraft, were the victims of spontaneous mob violence as well as of occasional official persecution."

This would actually weaken our conclusion! If persecuted groups, such as those accused of witchcraft, were the subject of popular hostility, and thus mob violence, that would strengthen the scholars' belief that persecution from authorities is due to popular hostility.

Answer Choice A states: "official persecutions in medieval times were usually preceded by officially sanctioned propaganda campaigns vilifying the groups to be persecuted."

This supports our conclusion, because it demonstrates that any popular hostility may actually be a result of medieval authorities' persecution and propaganda, as opposed to a pre-existing unrest.

I hope this helps!

Thanks, Amber - there was a confusion on my end sorry, the question was meant for Method of Argument.