Logical Reasoning

PT110 · S3 · Q14 People’s political behavior frequently does

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

People’s political behavior frequently does not match their rhetoric.

Conclusion

People's political behavior frequently doesn't match their rhetoric.

Intermediate Conclusion (thus)

Voters often reelect politicians whose behavior they resent.

Evidence

Many people complain about government intervention in their lives. But people tend not to reelect inactive politicians, and active politicians are passing laws whose enforcement affects voters' lives.

Evaluate

The cited phrase, "people tend not to reelect inactive politicians," is one of the supporting premises that helps establish that voters reelect politicians whose behavior they resent.

Voters preferentially reelect active politicians, active politicians tend to pass laws that intervene with people's lives, and people complain about government intervention in their lives.

Goal

The claim we're asked about is Support. The 2nd and 3rd sentences combine to support the 4th sentence, which provides support for the 1st sentence.

14.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the argument by the claim that people tend not to reelect inactive politicians?

  1. It describes a phenomenon for

    Wrong Role

    It is a phenomenon that people tend not to reelect inactive politicians. But the author never offers a causal explanation for why they get rid of the inactive ones and keep the active ones. In fact, the argument is all about showing how paradoxical this phenomenon. Voters are electing these active politicians because they resent their behavior. Voters are electing these active politicians in spite of the fact that they resent their behavior.

    17% picked this

  2. Correct

    It is a premise offered

    Why this is right

    This is what we wanted. We were about a Supporting Premise. The 2nd and 3rd sentence combine to support the 4th sentence.

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

    65% picked this

  3. It is offered as an

    Wrong Role

    The phrase isn't an example of the following claim. (It's extremely rare for an Example to come prior to the General claim it's illustrating. They kinda have to come after). An example of "A politician's activity consists largely in passing laws whose enforcement affects voters' lives" would be a sentence like, "for example, politicians passed a law raising the tax on cigarettes, so now smokers have to pay an extra thirty cents on every pack."

    1% picked this

  4. It is a generalization based

    Wrong Role

    Saying that this claim is based on some other claim makes it into a conclusion. It is not a conclusion. There was no support provided for the claim that people tend not to reelect inactive politicians.

    5% picked this

  5. It is cited as evidence

    Wrong Role

    Our claim is evidence for the Intermediate Conclusion in the 4th sentence, and thus indirectly it supports the Main Conclusion in the 1st sentence, but the 1st sentence doesn't say that people's behavior never matches their political beliefs, only that it frequently doesn't match.

    13% 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