Logical Reasoning · Point at Issue

PrepTest 105 · Section 2 · Question 13

Phase 1 (your first ~400 questions): read the guidance, then answer. No clock.

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type

Point at Issue

The one idea it tests

Two speakers agree on a lot; the fight is about the one reason the first speaker gave for ranking two things.

The basic logic

The first speaker compares two wrongs, then ranks one as more dangerous because only it harms people's bodies. The second speaker attacks that reason by saying the other wrong can hurt people too. Use the Two-Clipboard Test: find the claim one speaker says yes to and the other says no to.

Tiny words that decide it

“comparable”
“however”
“more dangerous”
“I disagree”

Playground logic

Frankie's top bun: slide-line cutting is worse because it can hurt kids, while lunch-line cutting only wastes time. Sharon's rebuttal: lunch-line cutting can hurt kids too. Their clipboards split on one line: is lunch-line cutting as risky to kids as slide-line cutting?

Step 2 · The kid story

Cutting in Line

Frankie and Sharon are at it again by the swings. "Cutting in the lunch line and cutting in the slide line are basically the same," Frankie says. "Both are skipping your turn and being rude. But slide-line cutting is worse, because kids can get knocked off the ladder. Lunch-line cutting only wastes a few minutes." Sharon crosses her arms. "No way! Say a kid cuts in the lunch line and bumps someone carrying hot soup. That kid could get burned. So lunch-line cutting hurts people too." Lulu writes on her clipboard: Frankie: lunch-line cutting is less risky. Sharon: not so fast. Both agree cutting is rude. Kevin, meanwhile, has cut in front of everyone for pineapple pizza.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Frankie: Cutting in the lunch line and cutting in the slide line are alike, since both skip someone's turn. But slide-line cutting is worse, because it can make kids fall, while lunch-line cutting only costs time. Sharon: Wrong! A lunch-line cutter could bump a kid carrying hot soup, so lunch-line cutting can hurt kids too.

Frankie and Sharon disagree about

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Case of the Two Trespasses

In a fictional town hearing, Councilor Brandt argues: "Climbing into the closed zoo and climbing into the closed library are similar. Both break into a place after hours. But the zoo is worse, because the animals can hurt people. In the library, only books get bent." Mr. Whitfield rises. "Councilor, the library's heavy rolling shelves can tip and crush someone in the dark. So library trespass can hurt people too." The judge leans in. "So you both agree these are trespasses. You split on one thing: whether the library break-in is as risky for people as the zoo break-in." Both lawyers nod, then glare at each other.

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 105, Section 2, Question 13 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Write each speaker's claims on two clipboards. Notice what the first speaker gives as the reason for ranking one thing above another. Then see exactly which part of that the second speaker attacks. The right answer is a claim one speaker clearly holds and the other clearly denies. Cross off any choice only one person talks about, or that both accept.