Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT129 S3 Q19 Explanation

Essayist: One of the drawbacks

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

TopicsPrinciple-Strengthen

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

Essayist: One of the drawbacks of extreme personal and political freedom is that free choices are often made for the worst. To expect people to thrive when they are given the freedom to make unwise decisions is frequently unrealistic. Once people see the destructive consequences of extreme freedom, they may prefer to Thus, one should not support political systems that allow extreme freedom.

What this question is testing

Principle-Strengthen

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
19.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify

Answer choices

  1. Bad Premise Match6% picked this

    One should not support any political system that will inevitably lead to the establishment of

    Is "extreme freedom" a political system that will inevitably lead to establishing a totalitarian regime? No, it's just a system that may incline people to prefer a totalitarian regime. Since systems with "extreme freedom" don't trigger this rule, this rule isn't helping us to justify the conclusion.

  2. Bad Conclusion Match4% picked this

    One should not expect everyone to thrive even in a political system that maximizes people's freedom

    We need a principle that tells us what type of political system we should / shouldn't support. This principle is about whether we should / shouldn't expect everyone to thrive. That language is nowhere close to the conclusion's, so this is not useful.

  3. Bad Premise Match4% picked this

    One should support only those political systems that give people the freedom to

    This rule says, "if system doesn't give freedom to make wise choices, don't support it". Is "extreme freedom" a political system that does not give people the freedom to make wise choices? No, it gives them the freedom. The author says that free choices are often made for the worst, but extreme freedom allows people to make wise / unwise choices.

  4. Correct74% picked this

    One should not support any political system whose destructive consequences could lead people to prefer

    Why this is right

    This says, "if a system's destructive consequences could lead people to prefer totalitarian political regimes, then we should not support it." And we know that systems with extreme freedom have destructive consequences that lead people to possibly prefer totalitarian regimes. The premise triggers this rule, and the rule gets us to our conclusion language of "should not support".

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

  5. Weak Premise Match12% picked this

    One should not support any political system that is based on unrealistic expectations about people's

    This says, "if a system is based on unrealistic expectations about people's behavior under that system, then we shouldn't support it." Were we told that systems with extreme freedom are based on unrealistic expectations about people's behavior? No, not quite. We weren't told that the system is based on unrealistic expectations. Our author was just saying, we should expect people to make some unwise choices in such a system. To expect otherwise would be unrealistic (he doesn't claim that anyone is expecting otherwise and certainly doesn't say that the system is based on the expectation of otherwise).

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