Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT112 S1 Q19 Explanation

Although it has been suggested

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

TopicsFlaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Although it has been suggested that Arton’s plays have a strong patriotic flavor, we must recall that, at the time of their composition, her country was in anything but a patriotic mood. Unemployment was high, food was costly, and crime rates were soaring. As a result, the general morale of her nation that any apparent patriotism in Arton’s work must have been intended ironically.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Conclusion

The author is saying: Arton's plays look patriotic, but really she was being ironic.

Evidence

The country was in a glum, non-patriotic mood when she wrote — unemployment, costly food, crime, low morale.

Evaluate

Notice the silent leap. Just because the country was glum doesn't mean Arton was glum, or that she shared the national outlook. Writers often write against the grain — sometimes their work is uplifting because the times are bad. The argument assumes Arton was in tune with the national mood, and so her patriotism must have been a sarcastic mirror of it. But that's not given — it's an unstated assumption.

Imagine a comedian writing jokes during a recession. We wouldn't infer that her jokes are ironic just because the country isn't in a laughing mood. People can write against their times.

Goal

The right answer says the argument takes for granted that Arton was attuned to the prevailing national mood.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
19.

The reasoning above is questionable because

Answer choices

  1. Bad Description1% picked this

    posits an unstated relationship between unemployment

    The argument lists unemployment, expensive food, and high crime as separate symptoms of a bad national mood — it doesn't claim any causal link between unemployment and crime. The flaw isn't about a hidden relationship between two of the listed conditions; it's about the leap from the country's mood to Arton's personal outlook.

  2. Bad Description4% picked this

    takes for granted that straightforward patriotism is not possible for a

    The argument doesn't treat "serious writer" as relevant — it doesn't claim that genuine patriotism is impossible for any serious writer. It claims that Arton's patriotism in this particular era must have been ironic because the era was unpatriotic. That's a different (and narrower) move than a blanket claim about serious writers.

  3. Correct86% picked this

    takes for granted that Arton was attuned to the predominant national attitude

    Why this is right

    This nails the assumption. The argument bridges "the country was unpatriotic" and "Arton's patriotic-sounding work was ironic" only by assuming Arton herself shared, or was attuned to, the prevailing national attitude. If she wasn't — if she was a contrarian, or if she was specifically pushing back against the national mood — her apparent patriotism could be sincere. The argument takes for granted that Arton was in lockstep with her countrymen's mood.

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

  4. Bad Objection3% picked this

    overlooks the fact that some citizens prosper in times of

    The argument's claim is about the predominant national mood — that the country was, on balance, in a low mood. The fact that some citizens prosper during high unemployment doesn't change the predominant mood claim, and so doesn't affect the argument. This objection wouldn't actually undercut the reasoning. The real flaw lies elsewhere: the leap from national mood to Arton's personal mood.

  5. Equivocation6% picked this

    confuses irony with a general decline in

    "Irony" is used in only one sense — the rhetorical sense (apparent meaning vs. actual meaning). "General decline in public morale" is a separate concept the argument uses straightforwardly. The argument doesn't conflate them or shift between meanings of "irony." The flaw isn't a word-meaning trick; it's the assumption about Arton's mood matching the country's.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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