Logical Reasoning

PT121 · S1 · Q24 Journalist: Although a recent poll

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

Journalist: Although a recent poll found that more than half of all eligible voters support the idea of a political party whose primary concern is education, only 26 percent would like to join it, and only 16 percent would be prepared to donate money to it.

Conclusion

It's unlikely that an education party is viable in the long run.

Evidence

You can't be a viable party unless you have at least 30% of voters prepared to support the party by either joining it or donating money.

Only 26% of people would like to join the education party, and only 16% would donate money.

Evaluate

In order for us to counter-argue that an education party could be viable, we'd have to come up with a way to say that they are meeting the required 30% threshold.

Some people might already be thinking of the "wiggle room" here -- if the 26% and 16% refer to different people, then they've already done it! 26 + 16 = 42%

The author is assuming that the 16% is a subset of the 26%.

If there were 100 voters, 26 were willing to join the education party, and 16 of those 26 would go another step and actually donate money to it.

But it's possible that 26 people are willing to join the education party, while others are not willing to join the party but support its causes enough that they'd consider donating money to it (sorta like me and the Green Party).

Goal

Look for an answer calling out the author's assumption that the 16% is smaller circle within the bigger circle of the 26%, or an answer raising the objection that these two stats might refer to different people, in which case the education party has met the 30% "join or donate" threshold for viability.

24.

The reasoning in the journalist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument fails to consider that

  1. some of those who said

    Strengthens

    If even less than the 16% ended up donating, that would only help the author argue that the education party isn't viable in the long run.

    1% picked this

  2. an education party could possibly

    No Impact

    Sure, that's possible, but the author's conclusion allows for that. Since the viability rule is just a historical "rule" from inductive reasoning, it's not a guarantee. But if there's "overwhelming historical evidence that X is the case", then concluding that "X will likely be the case" is pretty reasonable. The author is respecting history while allowing for a surprise, by saying "it's unlikely that an education party will be viable". We can't object to him by saying something he already admits is a possibility.

    15% picked this

  3. the 16 percent of eligible

    Too Weak

    The "almost as much money" is still less than what might be considered necessary to be viable. Also, the viability threshold was not about getting a certain amount of money, it was about getting a certain share of participation (30%), whether that participation be membership or money.

    28% picked this

  4. a party needs the appropriate

    Too Weak

    This is saying that more than 50% of voters "support the idea" of an education party, but the "appropriate support" refers specifically to the joining/donating actions. I "support the idea" of there being a Libertarian party, but that doesn't mean I'm going to join them or donate to them.

    10% picked this

  5. Correct

    some of the eligible voters

    Why this is right

    This allows us to argue that the education party could make that 30% threshold. If those 16% of people are willing to donate to the education party, even though they don't want to join the party, then the education party would have 42% of people who are prepared to support it by joining or donating.

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

    46% picked this

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