Q11 - Polls have shown that a higher percentage of graduatin

[783874728]

Could someone explains why E is incorrect?

[maryadkins]

This argument is that because graduating college students are more likely to support gov't services than students starting college, it means that people with a college education are more into gov't services than the general population.

The first thing that jumps out to me as wrong about this argument is that the premise compares two groups of COLLEGE KIDS, and the conclusion compares ONE of those groups to the GENERAL POPULATION. That's a big leap. Maybe the general population is nothing like 18-year-olds just starting college.

(A) doesn't weaken it. I mean, great! Then the poll wasn't biased. How does this weaken?

(B) like (A), is pretty consistent with the argument. Okay, so now we know WHY the college kids like social services. How does this weaken?

(C) if anything, lends credence to this argument! Retirees are saying the same thing! Nope.

(D)...now we're talking. People who did go to college (i.e., they DO have a college education), but they've been out for a bit, don't like social services more than the general population. In fact, they like them LESS. This weakens the argument.

(E) brings in strength of opinion which isn't what this argument is about. This argument is about whether they think gov't services are good (should be retained or increased), not how vehement they sound when they're polled. "Strong opinions" about gov't services, anyway, would have had to be in SUPPORT of them, since we're already told that they support them more than the younger kids. Also there's no mention of the general population.

[LukeM22]

Just wanted to chime in here.. I think E is tempting as a trap answer because if the word "strong" was not in there, and it was:

"Xyz students more likely to express opinions"

There it would be severely weakening because it makes an alternative explanation more plausible. Of course, "strong" in there completely changes the meaning of the sentence, and I think the LSAT is banking on students missing that word when reading too fast.