Q5 - Lahar: We must now settle on a procedure for

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Procedure

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: We should use majority vote to decide on meeting agenda.
Evidence: We have three options - unanimous consent is unlikely and forming a committee usually leads to bad stuff. (Majority vote is the only remaining option)

Answer Anticipation:
We usually need to characterize the evidence or the method on these questions. The author arrived at her final choice by ruling out to other choices.

Correct Answer:
D

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) The author presented three options on constitutional grounds, but she didn't rule out two of them on that basis. She ruled one out due to likelihood and the other due to a history of unsavory consequences.

(B) EVERY decision in the club? Too strong. This is just about a procedure for setting meeting agendas.

(C) She is not suggesting that we change the constitution. She is suggesting a method of setting meeting agendas.

(D) Correct! The conclusion recommends a choice. The evidence (basis) was eliminating the other two possible options. Another fancy LSAT way of saying this is "rules out competing alternatives".

(E) She does support one preference but she does not argue against any PEOPLE supporting the alternatives.

Takeaway/Pattern: The standard for right/wrong on these Describe the Argument questions is strictly, "does it match?" We can try to prephrase by getting used to typical ways of describing an argument: presents counterexample, uses analogy, discusses implications of logic, rules out other possibilities, etc.

#officialexplanation