Logical Reasoning

PT150 · S3 · Q20 History student: It is unfair

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

History student: It is unfair for the History Department to prohibit students from citing certain online encyclopedias in their research papers merely because these sources are not peer reviewed.

Student's Claims

1. It's unfair for the History Department to prohibit students from citing Wikipedia in their research papers because these sources are not peer reviewed.

2. Students should be allowed to read whatever they wish.

3. If students aren't allowed to read whatever they with, then it's censorship.

Professors's Responses

1. Does she think it is fair to prohibit citing Wikipedia in research papers? Yes. She disagrees with the student's first claim. Wikipedia, since it isn't peer reviewed, cannot reasonably be treated as reliable support for any claim.

2. Does she think students shouldn't be allowed to read whatever they wish? No. She explicitly agrees with the student's 2nd claim and says students are allowed to read whatever they like.

3. Does she think a student could be restricted from reading something they want to, but we wouldn't necessarily call it censorship? We have no idea. She never broaches the concept of censorship.

Goal

The student made three claims. The professor disagreed with the first, agreed with the second, and had no response to the third.

Let's look for an answer that sounds like the first claim: whether it's fair / unfair for the History Dept to forbid students from citing online encyclopedias in their research papers.

20.

The dialogue provides most support for the claim that the student and the professor disagree over whether

  1. research papers written for a

    Agree, if anything

    Neither person has a stance on whether "all" research papers written for "any" history class require some peer reviewed citations. And when it comes to this History Department they are in, they would agree that the current policy wants citations from sources that are peer reviewed. Another way to put this: the fight is over whether history departments should be requiring cited works to be peer reviewed. This answer is only talking about are history departments requiring such cited works.

    4% picked this

  2. Correct

    prohibiting a certain sort of

    Why this is right

    While the student never says this answer explicitly, he does seem to be assuming this idea, given his transition from his first to second sentence. He goes from saying, "We're prohibited from citing Wikipedia" to saying, "This is ridiculous. We should be allowed to read anything we wish. Why are they censoring us?" So he seems to be thinking that prohibiting the citation of Wikipedia amounts to prohibiting the reading of Wikipedia. Do the professor's claims support the Disagree Position, that "prohibiting students from citing Wikipedia does not amount to prohibiting them from reading it"? Yeah, again through the innuendo communicated by her pair of ideas. She is saying, "Yes, students can't cite Wikipedia, because it's not a peer reviewed source so it's unreasonable to treat it as reliable support. But students are allowed to read whatever they like." This is a weird correct answer, because it's definitely not touching on the central disagreement: whether it's fair / unfair for the History Dept. to forbid using Wikipedia as a cited source. Instead, it touches on an invisible association they're both making between whether a student can cite anything they want and whether they can read anything they want.

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

    87% picked this

  3. censorship of the reading of

    Unsupported 2nd Person: censorship

    The professor never addresses the concept of censorship at all, so we have no idea what she thinks in regard to that topic.

    2% picked this

  4. sources that are not peer

    Unsupported Agree Position

    We know that the professor would disagree with this claim -- she thinks that sources that are not peer reviewed can never reasonably be treated as reliable support for any claim. But can we support the Agree position? Does the student say that sources that aren't peer reviewed often have solid support for the claims they make? No, he says nothing like that. He clearly thinks it's unfair that he can't cite such sources in his paper, but it's too big a leap to think that because of this, he must believe that such sources often have solid support.

    4% picked this

  5. students should be allowed to

    Agree

    Both parties agree to this. Neither of them are trying to put any limitations on what students should be allowed to read.

    2% 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