Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT133 S2 Q25 Explanation

In ancient Greece, court witnesses

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

TopicsStrengthen

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

In ancient Greece, court witnesses were not cross­ examined and the jury, selected from the citizenry, received no guidance on points of law; thus, it was extremely important for litigants to make a good impression on the jurors. For this reason, courtroom oratory by litigants is a of morality held by the citizens of ancient Greece.

What this question is testing

Strengthen

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion more likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that are consistent with the argument but add no real support, or that strengthen a claim the argument doesn't make.

Winning move

Locate the gap between evidence and conclusion, then pick the choice that closes it.

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

The question
25.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen

Answer choices

  1. Out of Scope - Term Shift7% picked this

    Litigants believed jurors were more likely to be impressed by litigants whose

    Personality is not the same as morality.

  2. Too Weak6% picked this

    Litigants believed jurors were more likely to subject the litigants' personal moral codes to close critical scrutiny than were people who

    Close scrutiny of one’s moral code does not necessarily mean that the moral code was going to reflect the average citizen. It could be that litigants would profess an idealized moral code rather than one that accurately reflected the average citizen.

  3. Correct83% picked this

    Litigants believed jurors were likely to be impressed by litigants whose professed moral code most

    Why this is right

    This connects the need to impress the jurors with the professed moral code being a good indication of the moral code commonly held by the citizens of Greece.

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

  4. Weakens1% picked this

    Litigants believed jurors to be more impressed by litigants who were of the same economic

    This suggests that oratory by litigants would be a good source of data on something other than the common conceptions of morality.

  5. Weakens3% picked this

    Litigants believed jurors were likely to render their decisions based on a good understanding

    This suggests that oratory by litigants would be a good source of data on something other than the common conceptions of morality.

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