Ruth: To become a politician,

Answer choices

1. A

   Not Opposite22% picked this

   The response simply asserts a point of view opposite to Ruth’s without giving

   This is flirting with the Circular aspect of Stephanie's argument. She does offer a reason for her conclusion, it's just one that presumes the truth of the conclusion because it essentially reiterates the same meaning. Still, that's not the same as giving NO reason. But the bigger problem is that Stephanie is defending a point of view that isn't opposite to Ruth's. Ruth said "politicians should be required to have a diversity of experience. Stephanie never asserted "politicians should not be required to have a diversity of experience".

   22%
2. B

   Too Strong: not beneficial12% picked this

   The response fails to provide evidence for its assumption that experience is not beneficial to

   Stephanie isn't assuming that experience is not beneficial. She's only arguing that it's not sufficient to guarantee that you're worthy of the public trust. Getting good sleep is beneficial to good LSAT studying, but "simply getting good sleep does not guarantee that you're studying LSAT well".

   12%
3. C

   Correct61% picked this

   The response attributes to Ruth a view that is more vulnerable to criticism than any

   Why this is right

   This gets at Stephanie's false accusation of "as you suggest". Ruth never said that "simply having a diversity of experience makes you worthy of the public trust". That's a strong idea that's hard to defend (more vulnerable to criticism). She just said that diversity of experience should be a required trait of a politician. That's a milder idea that's much easier to defend.

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

   61%
4. D

   Irrelevant Distinction3% picked this

   The response fails to make a needed distinction between personal experience and

   Our logical problem with Stephanie's response isn't that she's talking about experience too broadly without getting nuanced about the type. It's that she's kind of lying or confused about what Ruth said.

   3%
5. E

   Too Strong: unimportant3% picked this

   The response fails to provide evidence for its assumption that flexibility is unimportant in the

   Stephanie isn't assuming that flexibility is unimportant. She's just arguing that diversity of experience (which according to Ruth is associated with more flexibility) isn't all you need to be worthy of the public trust.

   3%