Logical Reasoning

PT102 · S2 · Q23 Politician: Nobody can deny that

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Politician: Nobody can deny that homelessness is a problem yet there seems to be little agreement on how to solve it.

Conclusion

We should raise tax.

Evidence

Taxes would need to be raised for the government to address the homeless situation, and only the government can make the homeless problem disappear.

Evaluate

The premises do a good job of convincing us that, .

The conclusion is saying "we should raise taxes".

So the missing link is .

Goal

Look for something that strengthens the idea that , since from there we're convinced that raising taxes would be necessary.

23.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most supports the politician's argument?

  1. Only if a measure is

    Reversal

    We're saying, "raising taxes is required to solve a problem, thus we should adopt a tax increase". In other words, if a measure is required, then adopt it. (required ? adopt it) This answer says, only if a measure is required should we adopt it. (adopt it ? required)

    12% picked this

  2. Only if a measure is

    Wrong Trigger / Reversal

    Just like (A), this is not a rule that allows us to conclude that we should do something; it's only a rule that allows one to say you shouldn't. It's a rule that says if a measure should ? the measure is be adopted sufficient to solve the problem We want a rule that says if a measure is ? should be necessary to solve adopted The argument never said that raising taxes would be sufficient to solve the homelessness problem. It said that the homelessness problem requires government intervention, which requires raising taxes.

    2% picked this

  3. Correct

    If a measure is required

    Why this is right

    Raising taxes is required to have the government provide the homeless with housing, which is required for the homelessness problem to disappear. So since raising taxes is required to solve the homelessness problem, according to this answer choice, we should adopt the measure of raising taxes.

    Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    60% picked this

  4. If a measure is sufficient

    Wrong Trigger

    This answer is similar to (B) and focuses on the measure being sufficient. While this is a rule that allows one to conclude that one should do something, it does not have the correct trigger. The stimulus says that increasing taxes is required, not that it's sufficient. It's a rule that says if a measure is ? should not be sufficient to solve adopted We want a rule that says if a measure is ? should be necessary to solve adopted The argument never said that raising taxes would be sufficient to solve the homelessness problem. It said that the homelessness problem requires government intervention, which requires raising taxes.

    5% picked this

  5. If a measure is sufficient

    Wrong Trigger

    Nothing in the paragraph is identified as "sufficient to solve a problem", so we would have no way to trigger this rule. Wording like "only if" and "necessitates" is identifying things as necessary.

    21% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free