Logical Reasoning

PT123 · S2 · Q11 It is now a common complaint

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

It is now a common complaint that the electronic media have corroded the intellectual skills required and fostered by the literary media.

Conclusion (so)

Electronic media is probably just altering the human mind, not devolving it.

Evidence

Several centuries ago people complained that the spread of literacy was destroying certain intellectual skills of the oral culture.

Evaluate

When read arguments on Role (and Main Conclusion) we know about half of them are rebuttal style. So if the paragraph begins with an Attribution, such as "it is now a common complaint that X", then we'll anticipate a Pivot from our author into a rebuttal.

Sure enough, the second sentence begins with the Pivot 'but'. Pivots almost always mean that we're leaving the counterpoint / background area of the stimulus and entering the Author's Argument. The fact that the structure is, "But claim 1. So, claim 2" tells us that claim 1 is support and claim 2 is the conclusion.

Rebuttal arguments are usually refuting the original claim in the Attribution. In this case, is our author arguing that, "electronic media are NOT corroding our literary skills?"

It's kinda hard to say. She might be arguing,

Or she might be saying, as a way to to say that, . It's just ALTERING us, not making us worse (devolving us).

Goal

We're being asked about the second sentence. We identified that as the Premise, which is supporting the conclusion in the third sentence.

11.

The reference to the complaint of several centuries ago that powerful memory and extemporaneous eloquence were being destroyed plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

  1. evidence supporting the claim that

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This answer correctly says the Role was "evidence", but it offers a completely different conclusion than the 3rd sentence (in fact it's really opposite of the real conclusion).

    4% picked this

  2. an illustration of the general

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The general hypothesis being advanced is that "electronic media will change how we think, but degrade how we think". Even though "illustrations" are a form of evidence, and the sentence we're being asked about was evidence, the sentence we're being asked about was not an illustration of the conclusion. An illustration of the conclusion would be a specific example in which electronic media is changing our mind, but not devolving it.

    3% picked this

  3. Correct

    an example of a cultural

    Why this is right

    This correctly describes the role of the claim as an example that supports the point that what awaits us is probably a mere alteration of the human mind rather than its devolution. They are purposefully avoiding an easier word like "premise / evidence". Instead, this answer describes how it functioned as evidence. It provided evidence of what the author assumes is a historically repeating phenomenon: a new technology emerges and people worry that this cultural change will corrode / devolve the human mind, even though it does not do so. The author is using this Past example in order to argue by analogy that we'll see something similar in the Present / Future when it comes to the effects of electronic media.

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

    68% picked this

  4. evidence that the claim that

    Weaker Conclusion Match

    This answer is fairly tempting, since our claim IS evidence, and our author is trying to argue that "electronic media are probably NOT corroding the intellectual skills required and fostered by literary media". But it's not a great match for the conclusion, since it doesn't mention anything about electronic media, and we might wonder whether "skills are lost" is the same as "skills are corroded". This author might believe that our literary intellectual skills ARE being lost, just not due to electronic media. If the answer said, "evidence that the claim that electronic media has corroded our literary intellectual skills is unwarranted" it would be a lot better. This answer also does a worse job than (C) does at capturing the way in which it's evidence for the author's conclusion. In other words, this answer makes it seem more like the 2nd sentence was direct evidence that we still have the intellectual skills required and fostered by the literary media. It certainly was not that, since the evidence isn't even about the present tense. The evidence is showing us an analogous situation from centuries ago, leaving us to fill in the blanks and assume that the author is saying, "Today's situation will probably play out in a similar way". (C) feels like a better description of what role this claim plays in supporting the ultimate conclusion.

    21% picked this

  5. possible evidence, mentioned and then

    Opposite

    This is saying that the 2nd claim was evidence for an Opposing Position, but we know that this claim was evidence (the only piece of evidence in fact) for the Author's Position.

    4% 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