#4 - Weaken

[falconbridge]

Hello,

This question asks, "With respect to the Cold War, the author's attitude can most accurately be described as..." and the correct answer is C: "convinced that it provides an important example of bipolarity maintaining peace."

I am cognizant to never fight the LSAT as it's akin to the futility of arguing with a referee; however, I am not understanding how this answer is correct.

In the last sentence of the passage the author writes, "In contrast, the principal attributes of bipolar systems [...] may have created the necessary parameters for general peace in the second half of the twentieth century." When I read the passage and applied the VIEWSTAMP methodology I highlighted the word "MAY" perceiving it be reflective of the author's tone.

With this in mind, when I read the answers to this question I zoned in on the fact that C used the word "CONVINCED" and thus, eliminated it believing "convinced" to be incompatible with "MAY."

So, can somehow please explain to me how C - featuring the word "convinced" - MOST ACCURATELY describes the author's attitude towards the Cold War when he explicitly states that "bipolar systems [...] MAY have created the necessary parameters for general peace in the second half of the twentieth century" ?

Much thanks,

Falcon

[Paul Marsh]

Hi Falcon, good question.

I agree with you that there is a bit of a disconnect between the tone of the last sentence of the passage (using "may") and the "convinced" language in (C). As such, (C) would likely have been an even better answer choice if it said something a little less strong such as, "believing that it provides an example of bipolarity maintaining peace."

However, we're looking for the most accurate answer choice.(C) does get the substance of the author's attitude correct. While (C) probably assigns a bit more confidence to that view than the passage warrants, there is still specific and significant support for that attitude in the passage.

On the other hand, there is no support whatsoever for any of the other answer choices in the passage. As always for RC, we want to be able to articulate the specific portion of the passage that supports our answer choice. If we're unable to do so, it's probably the wrong answer.

Hope that helps!

[JoshuaDEL]

Hello,

I'm surprised not a lot of people are discussing this question.

I too had a problem with this as I have eliminated C for the same reason and chose B instead. I chose B because the second paragraph says that the bipolar systems "lead to frequent confrontations, debilitating armed conflict". And then the last paragraph begins by saying there are good reasons to reassess them in a "new light". Together, this seems like the author believes the bipolar system during Cold War created parameters of general peace unlike the typical expected case ( = surprised) which usually leads to frequent confrontations, debilitating armed conflict ( = major war).

As you mentioned, I may have chosen C if anything else was far from supported, but B seemed to be much more reasonable than to ignore the difference in tone between "may" = "convinced". The tone is something that LSAT seems to really emphasize and focus and it seems wrong to accredit an answer while saying the tone of the word is negligible because the rest of the sentence is supported. I feel like people would have easily crossed C out if there were better answers instead of getting stuck between those two choices which tells me that it's not a good answer choice.

My question is why is my reasoning for B wrong and what makes my error in reasoning more significant than the error in the tone of C?

Thanks in advance.

[Adam Tyson]

I'll echo what Paul said earlier in this thread, and I share your hesitation about "convinced" vs "may," JoshuaDEL. As Paul said (and I agree), despite this troubling aspect of answer C it is still the best answer of the bunch. I find "surprised" to be even more jarring in tone compared to what the passage gave us. First, the idea of "a major war" isn't exactly what the author suggested was an expected result of a bipolar relationship. Rather, it was "frequent confrontations, debilitating armed conflict, and, eventually, to the capitulation of one or the other side."

The second reason I see no surprise is that the author is looking back at history with knowledge that no major war occurred. The author is not surprised at that, because that's the facts! Instead, the author sees what happened AFTER the Cold War as evidence for a need to reevaluate theories about bipolar systems.

Finally, in defense of "convinced," while the author may be uncertain about exactly what it all means, the author nonetheless seems convinced that the Cold War dynamic DID maintain peace. The evidence for this is is in the second paragraph, where the author describes the deterioration in Europe after it ended. The author says that the situation calls for a reassessment of the theory. Not that it MAY call for one, but that is DOES - that's certainty. They also say that the dynamics that existed after the Concert of Europe WOULD, if they existed today, cause instability and conflicts - again, certainty that the Cold War was different and an important example.

I still don't love answer C! But it is, in my view, far better than any other answer choice than any of the others, while answer B feels completely unsupported to me. I see no surprise, only an academic interest.

[JoshuaDEL]

Makes more sense. Thank you!