Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT127 S3 Q15 Explanation

As part of a new trend

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

TopicsMost Supported

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

As part of a new trend in the writing of history, an emphasis on the details of historical events and motivations has replaced the previous emphasis on overarching historical trends and movements, with the result that the latter are often overlooked. In consequence, the ominous parallels that may also overlooked, which lessens our ability to learn from history.

What this question is testing

Most Supported

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question
15.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong8% picked this

    Studying the details of historical events and motivations lessens our ability to

    While replacing one emphasis for another lessons our ability to learn from history, it’s unclear whether it is the new emphasis, the loss of the old emphasis, or the combination of both that lessons our ability to learn from history.

  2. Unsupported Relationship3% picked this

    Overarching historical trends and movements can be discerned only when details of historical events and

    The statements do not imply, as this answer does, that the two emphases are incompatible.

  3. Too Strong4% picked this

    Those who attend to overall trends and movements in history and not to details are the best able

    While those who attend to overall trends in history are better able to learn from history than those who attend to details, it does not follow that those who attend to overall trends are the best able to learn from history.

  4. Correct79% picked this

    A change in emphasis in the interpretation of history has lessened our ability to

    Why this is right

    The words “in consequence” imply that the first statement (the change in emphasis in the interpretation of history) caused the second (our ability to learn from history has been lessened) to occur.

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

  5. Too Strong5% picked this

    History should be interpreted in a way that gives equal emphasis to overarching historical trends and movements and to the details

    While the change lessons our ability to learn from history, that does not imply that the new trend in the writing of history should be abandoned, nor does it suggest that a model giving equal emphasis to both forms of interpreting history should be embraced.

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