Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: pt 30 dec 99 lr sect 2 #19  (Read 482 times)

big east boy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
pt 30 dec 99 lr sect 2 #19
« on: August 16, 2008, 09:41:14 AM »
columnist:
a recent study suggests that living with a parrot increases one's risk of lung cancer.  But no one thinks the government should impose financial impediments on the owning of parrots because of the apparent danger.  So by the same token, the government should not levy analogous special taxes on hunting gear, snow skis, recreational parachutes, or motorcycles.

Each of the following principles is logically consistent with the columnists conclusion EXCEPT:

C)  The government should create financial disincentives to deter participation in activies it deems dangerous.
This is the right answer and I understand why, but what I don't understand is what is logically consistent about answer choice A:
The government should fund education by taxing nonessential sports equipment and recreational gear.

Bernie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: pt 30 dec 99 lr sect 2 #19
« Reply #1 on: August 16, 2008, 12:24:50 PM »
What's probably giving you grief is the word "consistent".  It has two meanings, and the meaning that is used in the logical reasoning section is "not self-contradictory" (listed as the first definition in dictionary.com; the second definition is the one we more commonly use and probably the one you were thinking of.)

If the government funded education by taxing nonessential sports equipment, this would not contradict the principle in the paragraph that it shouldn't try to deter dangerous behavior by imposing a tax.  Choice A isn't saying that the government is trying to create a financial impediment on dangerous stuff, only that it is trying to raise money by taxing non-essential stuff.

ssilver0210

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 212
    • View Profile
    • Silverman Bar Preparation
    • Email
Re: pt 30 dec 99 lr sect 2 #19
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2008, 01:16:28 PM »
Bernie's explanation is correct, and I'll just add the following which might help you see why choice A is not logically inconsistent (or is logically consistent) with the stimulus.

Let's say two people were arguing. The first says:

I believe that the government should not try to prevent those from taking part in apparently dangerous activities, by imposing financial impediments ( taxing certain items) on those taking part in the activities.

The second says:

My belief is that the government should impose financial impediments on people ( taxing certain items), if doing so will help to fund education.

We can not be certain, based on person two's statement, that person two would disagree with person one.  The reason we can not be certain is because the argument stated by person two does not contradict the argument stated by person one.  Although person two believes that taxing items for the purpose of funding education is reasonable, he might still believe that taxing for deterring dangerous activities is unreasonable. Because nothing in person two's statement expresses disagreement with person one, we can not say that person two's statement is logically inconsistent with person one's.  Because it is logically consistent, it can not be the correct answer choice.



I provide tutoring both for the LSAT and the MBE at very reasonable rates.  I provide a free hour to all students to try out the tutoring.  Feel free to contact me at silvermanbarprep@gmail.com for tutoring inquires or to set up a free lesson. Visit my blog @ http://www.mbetutorial.blogspot.com

Bernie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: pt 30 dec 99 lr sect 2 #19
« Reply #3 on: August 16, 2008, 11:50:25 PM »
Nice!  Great explanation!

ssilver0210

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 212
    • View Profile
    • Silverman Bar Preparation
    • Email
Re: pt 30 dec 99 lr sect 2 #19
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2008, 08:29:59 AM »
Thanks, Bernie.

I provide tutoring both for the LSAT and the MBE at very reasonable rates.  I provide a free hour to all students to try out the tutoring.  Feel free to contact me at silvermanbarprep@gmail.com for tutoring inquires or to set up a free lesson. Visit my blog @ http://www.mbetutorial.blogspot.com