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: 8917
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#23033
Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (C)

Mary Ann believes that it is most important for her country to be strong, because that earns respect and makes a country admirable.

Inez argues that strength has often been used for wrong. She concludes that a country should be judged on morality, not strength, stating that if actions are morally good, then a country is admirable.

Both arguments are horrible. In fact, they are so bad that describing all their flaws would involve a rather long essay. In such cases, you need to read the question so that you do not waste time. The question directs you to identify an assumption of Inez's argument. Inez ignores the possibility that a criteria other than both morality and strength would better indicate whether a country should be admired. Furthermore, what does she mean by "morality"? What makes a country's actions "moral"?

Answer choice (A): Inez's argument does not require the idea that at least one country is admirable. Inez merely proposes a means of determining whether a country is admirable, which does not necessitate that sometimes the judgment is positive. You may have immediately selected this response because of the phrase "at least one." You can speed yourself up a bit by relying on tendencies, but if you do so you need to realize that you will not be successful 100% of the time. Depending on your scoring level, it may be best to hold such techniques in reserve (the higher you are scoring, the less you should rely on guesswork).

Answer choice (B): Even if countries could be both strong and moral, Inez could still be correct that morality is the correct standard for admiration. Since the negation of this choice does not harm Inez's argument, this choice represents an inessential assumption.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. Inez argues that morality should be the standard for admiration, and states that countries should be judged by the morality of their actions. For that to be possible, she must presuppose that it is possible to morally weigh the actions of countries.

Answer choice (D): The assumption that each citizen of any country believes the actions of his country are good might actually be problematic for Inez's argument (because that assumption makes it more difficult to assign unbiased moral weight), so this choice does not deliver an essential assumption.

Answer choice (E): Inez argues that morality is the proper standard for admiration, and does not proceed to consider whether countries should impose their morality in an effort to become more admirable. This incorrect choice addresses a concern that might follow after one accepts Inez's argument.
 cgleeson
  • Posts: 75
  • Joined: Feb 13, 2022
|
#94343
Hi,
For me this explanation was a little hard to get. I went back to the question and then came back to the explanation and now I get the reasoning of why C is correct. I had originally chose A, and I think it was because I didn't understand the question stem. This was really helpful! Thank you so much.
Chris 8-)
User avatar
 Beth Hayden
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 123
  • Joined: Sep 04, 2021
|
#94407
Hi Chris,

Yup, just a necessary assumption question in fancy clothing!

Briefly on (A), it's not necessary for Inez's argument that at least one country is admirable, she just sets the standard for what it means to be admirable. She says that IF the country takes actions that are morally good, then they are admirable. But if all the countries are horribly immoral then there just wouldn't be any countries that Inez thinks we should admire.

Hope that helps!
Beth
 cgleeson
  • Posts: 75
  • Joined: Feb 13, 2022
|
#94467
Hi again Beth..... I think we are onto something with me reading the question stems correctly. I think what I'm going to do is keep the Primary Objectives open and pay particular attention to PO #5.
Chris
Beth Hayden wrote: Tue Mar 22, 2022 7:02 pm Hi Chris,

Yup, just a necessary assumption question in fancy clothing!

Briefly on (A), it's not necessary for Inez's argument that at least one country is admirable, she just sets the standard for what it means to be admirable. She says that IF the country takes actions that are morally good, then they are admirable. But if all the countries are horribly immoral then there just wouldn't be any countries that Inez thinks we should admire.

Hope that helps!
Beth
User avatar
 askuwheteau@protonmail.com
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: Feb 08, 2024
|
#105944
What elements of the two arguments make them weak arguments?
 Luke Haqq
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 742
  • Joined: Apr 26, 2012
|
#105967
Hi askuwheteau!

For one example, Mary Ann concludes that "above all," the country should be strong. She goes on to mention that strength might gain admiration from other countries, but why does that matter? Why is that a reason to prioritize strength above everything else? Why not prioritize people, or health, or any number of things? There isn't really much argumentation that justifies why strength should be prioritized "above all."

For another example, you might glean something that could be seen as a weakness of Inez's argument based on the correct answer choice: the argument presupposes that it is possible to assign moral weight to the actions of countries. However, what if it were not possible to assign such moral weight to their actions? Inez doesn't consider or address this.
User avatar
 askuwheteau@protonmail.com
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: Feb 08, 2024
|
#105986
Hi Luke,

I understand now. Thanks for providing clarification on the issue.

Best,

Jonathan

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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