Logical Reasoning · Point at Issue

PrepTest 115 · 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 may agree on most facts and still split over which worry matters more.

The basic logic

Fill a clipboard for each speaker: what does each one care about most? The disputed point is the one item where one speaker would check 'yes' and the other 'no.' Often it is a trade-off between two values, not a fact about the world.

Tiny words that decide it

“I disagree”
“risk”
“likely”
“outweigh”

Playground logic

Frankie wants the 6 a.m. walk so the trip is sure to be worth it. Sharon thinks 8 a.m. is probably fine too and safer in the light. Their clipboards split on one question: is guaranteeing a useful trip worth the risk of tripping in the dark?

Step 2 · The kid story

The Great Dog-Walk Debate

Frankie and Sharon were arguing again, this time about Biscuit. "We should walk him at six in the morning," said Frankie. "The park is empty then for sure, so he can run off the leash. If we go later, we might make the whole trip for nothing." Sharon shook her head. "I disagree. The park will probably still be pretty empty at eight. And at eight it's light out, so we're way less likely to trip over a root in the dark." Lulu wrote two columns on her clipboard. Frankie: no wasted trips. Sharon: no tripping. "You two don't really fight about the park," Lulu said. "You fight about which worry wins." Biscuit, who just wanted to go, lay down and sighed.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Frankie: We should walk Biscuit at 6 a.m., because the park is surely empty then and he can run off the leash. If we go later, we risk a wasted trip. Sharon: I disagree. The park will probably be fairly empty still at 8 a.m., and walking then means less risk of tripping in the dark.

The conversation best supports the claim that Frankie and Sharon disagree about whether

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Case of the Midnight Cake

A bakery and a wedding planner went to court over when to deliver a giant cake. The planner's lawyer said, "Deliver at four in the morning. Then the cake is surely there before the party, and none of it goes to waste." Mr. Whitfield, for the bakery, said, "We disagree. Seven o'clock will very likely still be in time, and at seven our driver isn't half asleep at the wheel." The judge set down her pen. "Neither of you says the four o'clock cake would be late. Neither says the driver is wide awake at four. What you really dispute is which matters more: making sure the cake isn't wasted, or keeping the driver safe." Both lawyers nodded. The cake, waiting in the cooler, said nothing.

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 115, Section 2, Question 13 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Give each speaker a clipboard and list what each one claims and what each one cares about. Cross off items only one speaker addresses, and items both would accept. Look at what each speaker is willing to trade for what. If one puts a cost first and the other puts a danger first, the disputed point is often which concern outweighs the other. Choose the item where their answers truly differ.