Logical Reasoning

PT23 · S3 · Q4 Historian: The central claim of

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

Historian: The central claim of the “end-of-history” theory is that history has reached its final stage of development.

Statements

“End-of-history” theory claims that history has reached the final stage of development; it’s at an ideological end.

pivot (but)

This view fails to consider that it’s impossible to stand outside of history to judge whether history is really at an end.

Evaluate

When we see the final claim of an Inference paragraph start off with a Pivot word, we want to make our brains say whatever the “net effect” is of synthesizing this last idea with what came before it.

If we were going to turn this into an argument, and the author is rebutting the end of history theorists by saying that there’s no way for any of us to know whether history has actually reached its end, what would the author’s conclusion sound like?

Goal

Look for a safely worded answer that sounds like it’s rejecting the end-of-history theory in some way.

4.

Which one of the following can be most reasonably inferred from the historian’s statement?

  1. Correct

    We can never know whether

    Why this is right

    Since it’s impossible to stand outside all of history and judge whether it’s really at an end, it’s impossible to judge whether history is at an end. And since the end-of-history claims that history it at an end, it’s impossible to judge whether they’re correct.

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

    78% picked this

  2. Advocates of the end-of-history theory

    Out of Scope: too ideological

    The author doesn’t say anything that sounds like an accusation that these theorists are being too ideological. The author just thinks they’re being delusional self-confident in thinking that they can clearly tell whether history is at an end. It’s like living inside our universe and declaring “This is it. There’s nothing beyond our universe.” How would you know? You can’t judge whether this is it, if you’re still stuck inside of it.

    5% picked this

  3. If we were at the

    Too Strong: automatically know Contradicted

    If we were at the end of history, we wouldn’t know for sure, since it’s impossible to stand outside of history and judge whether history is really at its end.

    3% picked this

  4. It is impossible for the

    Too Strong: impossible

    The author leaves open the possibility that the theorists are correct. She is saying, “We may be at the end of history. It’s impossible for us to judge (one way or the other).”

    12% picked this

  5. Ideological developments are the essential

    Too Strong: essential

    Nothing in the paragraph supports such an extreme claim that “the essential elements of history are ideological developments”.

    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