June 2007 LSAT Question Explanations June 2007 - Sec 2 - LR...

June 2007 - Sec 2 - LR - Q19

Video Transcript:

0:06
Question 19, Historian: The Land Party achieved its only national victory in Banestria in
0:14
1935.
0:16
It received most of its support that year in rural and semirural areas, where the bulk
0:21
of Banestria's population lived at the time.
0:23
The economic woes of the years surrounding that election hit agriculture and small business
0:28
interests the hardest, and the Land Party specifically targeted those groups in 1935.
0:34
I conclude that the success of the Land Party that year was due to the combination of the
0:39
Land Party specifically addressing the concerns of these groups and the depth of the economic
0:45
problem people in these groups where facing.
0:50
First step, we know argument or set of facts?
0:53
Clearly, we have an argument here and our conclusion is, "I conclude that the success
1:00
of the Land Party that year"?what year was that?
1:05
1935?"was due to the Land Party specifically addressing the concerns of these groups and
1:11
the depth of the economic problem people in these groups where facing."
1:15
How do we know that?
1:19
?The Land Party achieved its only national victory in 1935 and it received most of its
1:26
support that year in rural and semirural areas.
1:30
The economic woes of the years surrounding that election hit agriculture and small business
1:36
the hardest, and the Land Party specifically targeted those groups in 1935.?
1:43
So there's our support and you notice that this is a cause and effect argument.
1:48
We have an observed effect that this author is trying to explain to us.
1:53
What is that observed effect?
1:59
It is that the Land Party won a national victory in 1935.
2:08
The authors proposed cause?
2:10
We look to the conclusion here we see that it was a combination of two things: The Land
2:16
Party specifically addressing the concerns of these groups, so targeting rural and semirural
2:25
areas, and the depth of the economic problems the people in these groups where facing.
2:34
Now that we have the structure of the passage clear, we have broken down the argument, we
2:39
will proceed to the question stem.
2:41
Each one of the following, if true, strengthens the historian?s argument except?
2:46
So you'll notice, strengthens but except.
2:51
So now we have a Bizzaro Strengthen question.
2:56
Now our four incorrect answer choices are going to strengthen the argument, whereas
3:05
our correct answer does not strengthen.
3:14
Keeping that in mind, we turn our attention to (A).
3:20
In preceding elections, the Land Party made no attempt to address the interests of economically
3:25
distressed urban groups.
3:28
Does that strengthen?
3:30
Well it is a very popular answer choice for students to eliminate because they think that
3:35
it does strengthen it by showing where we didn't have the cause of them targeting these
3:40
groups, we didn't have the effect where they didn't win because this was their only national
3:45
victory in 1935.
3:48
But (A) is a perfect example of why you must read carefully on the LSAT, because we did
3:53
not talk about urban groups.
3:56
We were talking about targeting rural and semirural areas.
4:00
Therefore, (A) does not strengthen and (A) would be the correct answer.
4:08
It's completely irrelevant.
4:11
We are not talking about urban groups, we are talking about rural and semirural areas.
4:16
They targeted these areas during their economic crisis when their economic woes were high
4:22
and they had their only national victory.
4:23
(A) is completely irrelevant, does not strengthen, and again highlights that you must read carefully.
4:32
Now, lets just check (B)-(E), which obviously are going to strengthen this argument.
4:40
(B), voters are more likely to vote for a political party that focuses on their problems.
4:44
Clearly, (B) strengthens by tying in this idea that the national party specifically
4:50
targeted these groups in the rural and semirural areas, then they would be more likely to vote
4:57
for the Land Party, so (B) strengthens the argument.
5:00
Again, Bizzaro Strengthen question, so (B) now is incorrect.
5:05
We are looking for the answer choice that didn't strengthen, which was (A).
5:09
(C), the Land Party had most of its successes when there was economic distress on the agriculture
5:14
sector.
5:15
Again, strengthens by showing consistency.
5:18
Before when we had success on behalf of the Land Party, it was when there was stress in
5:24
the agriculture sector.
5:25
These are the groups they target, they are the Land Party.
5:28
(C) strengthens, (C) would be eliminated.
5:31
(D), no other major party in Banestria?s specifically addressed the issues of people
5:36
who lived in the semirural areas in 1935.
5:40
You notice that also strengthens it because if that was the cause, specifically addressing
5:45
the issues of the people who lived in the semi-rural areas well it strengthens the argument
5:51
that no other party did this in 1935.
5:55
It strengthens that that is why the Land Party won, so (D) is out.
5:59
(E), the greater the degree of economic distress someone is in, the more likely that person
6:04
is to vote.
6:05
Again, strengthens the argument by tying in this idea that they were in economic distress.
6:09
Right?
6:10
The economic woes of the surrounding years of the election hit agriculture the hardest.
6:15
So tying that in to this idea of the Land Party winning a national election, they are
6:21
more likely to vote when they are in economic distress.
6:24
So (E) does strengthen and (E) would be eliminated.
6:29
Here you see a Bizzaro Strengthen where we are looking for the opposite now.
6:32
The correct answer does not strengthen, where as the four incorrect answer choices here,
6:37
(B) (C) (D) and (E) did strengthen.