Logical Reasoning · Point at Issue

PrepTest 142 · Section 2 · Question 7

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 can disagree about a recommendation even when they never argue about each other's reasons.

The basic logic

Use the Two-Clipboard Test: what would each speaker say yes or no to? One praises an activity for children; the other objects to it. They need not clash on the facts each one cites, but they clash on whether children should do it.

Tiny words that decide it

“objection”
“beneficial”
“in short”

Playground logic

Frankie praises juggling for kids: fun, focus, patience. Sharon objects that it steals time from reading. They never argue about patience. Their two clipboards split on one line: should kids learn juggling?

Step 2 · The kid story

The Great Juggling Debate

Frankie burst into the classroom with three beanbags. "Juggling is great for kids! It's fun, it builds focus, it teaches patience, and it stops you from rushing. Basically, it makes you grow up a little." Sharon folded her arms. "Here's my problem with kids learning juggling. Every hour on beanbags is an hour not spent reading, and reading actually helps people. Juggling doesn't help anyone." Lulu held up two clipboards. On Frankie's she wrote: Should kids learn juggling? YES. On Sharon's: Should kids learn juggling? NO. "Did Sharon say juggling doesn't build patience?" Lulu asked. "No," said Priya. "She just thinks it costs too much." "Then that's the fight," said Lulu, tapping the yes and the no.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Frankie: Juggling is good for children. It is fun and builds focus and patience. It helps kids grow up. Sharon: My problem with children learning to juggle is that it takes time away from reading, which is useful, and puts it into something that is not.

The dialogue gives the most support for saying that Frankie and Sharon disagree about whether

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Zoning Board Duet

At a hearing on a new skate park, one witness said, "Skating is healthy for teens. It's exercise, it builds balance, and it teaches persistence." A second witness said, "My concern with building it is that the land could hold a clinic instead, which serves everyone, while a skate park serves few." Mr. Whitfield, acting as clerk, summarized. "Your Honor, the second witness never denied that skating builds balance. The first never talked about clinics." The judge nodded. "So the real dispute is whether the park should be built at all." "Exactly," said Mr. Whitfield. "One yes, one no."

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 142, Section 2, Question 7 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Write each speaker's view on a separate clipboard. For each answer, ask: would the first speaker say yes, and the second say no (or the reverse)? If a speaker is silent on it, it fails. Notice that an objection to an activity is a no on whether to do it, and praise of its benefits for a group implies a yes. Reject answers about reasons only one speaker mentions or claims neither one makes.