#25 - Concept Reference, Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

The correct answer choice is (B).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[avengingangel]

I still don't understand how B is superior to E, but, more importantly, I don't understand one of the major concepts of the whole dang passage, apparently. This "British traditions of liberty" that is referenced in several questions... whereeee does Drescher talk about it ??

[Adam Tyson]

Bear with me on this one, Angel, as my electronic copy of the test doesn't have all the line numbers quite right, and no paragraph breaks. That said, take a look at or just after line 30, the sentence beginning with "Eschewing Descher's idealization..." - that's where you find some reference to Drescher's view on those traditions. You'll find more, by implication rather than stated outright, in earlier lines that talk about Drescher's argument against purely economic interests being the motivating factor behind abolition. He talks about populist characteristics, and about cutting across lines of class, part, and religion. The strong implication here is that Drescher is arguing that abolition was driven by ideals, not by money, and that people at all levels of society shared those ideals (not just abolitionists).

As to answer E, our author is not particularly convinced by Drescher's argument, and seems more inclined towards Eltis'. The author says that Drescher fails to explain widespread popular support could have been achieved, and then later, while describing Eltis' position, tells us that he eschewed Drescher's view. His attitude towards Eltis seems to be fairly positive, so it's a fair bet that he sides with Eltis and against Drescher on at least that point. That's why E is not as well supported an answer as B.

[avengingangel]

Thanks, Adam.

In hindsight, I see why B is superior, but I'm afraid I might get caught in a similar trap again if I encounter a similar situation. I really liked 'superficially convincing' because the author introduces Descher's perspective as one of the recent "impressive studies," but then the author does indeed say he fails to explain how widespread popular support could have been achieved. So, it's like it was convincing on the surface, but when you get into it, it's faulty/has shortcomings (aka, superficially convincing!). And yes, the author does note that Eltis eschews (a new word I learned from studying for the LSAT Descher's idealistic views, but I didn't take that as the author's viewpoint, but more Eltis'.

Again, in review, I do see why B is a very strong answer here (er, the strongest), but my brain is still struggling with conforming to this test's (or rather, the test makers') train of thought! So silly sometimes.

Thanks again. Any additional elaboration is appreciated.

(For my own future reference: 2-122)

[yrivers]

Could you please explain further why B is correct? I'm not sure what part of the passage indicates the "unrealistic" piece of this answer.

[Charlie Melman]

Hi Y,

In line 31, the author refers to Drescher's "idealizations." That word implies that the author views Drescher's view about British traditions concerning liberty as a bit "pie in the sky," or unrealistic.

Hope this helps!

[sherrilynm]

I also had the same line of reasoning as Angel did - the author calls Drescher's argument both "impressive" and "a more balanced view" than William's. I understand why B is correct, but I still do not understand the thought process behind ruling out E.

[James Finch]

Hi Sherilynn,

This is one of those tricky LSAT questions that requires test takers to very carefully examine the scope of the claims made, both implicit and explicit, by the author, and do so within the entire context of the passage. The author's tone abruptly changes when presenting Drescher's views in the second paragraph; the "impressive" and "more balanced" superlatives must be read more ambiguously when the author reveals his/her critique of the shortcomings of Drescher's arguments. The specific criticism that Drescher fails to explain how conservative Lords mobilized the disenfranchised working masses to support abolition of slavery shows that the author does not find Drescher's argument "convincing," even "superficially" so.

Contrast that to answer choice (B), which connects back to the logical gap in Drescher's arguments, which the author then uses to segueway into a more positive description of Eltis's views, views that are at least partially incompatible with Drescher's. So the more negative tone of (B) is more likely to describe the author's views than the neutral-to-positive tone of (E).

Hope this clears things up!

[sdb606]

I picked E because the passage says, "Yet, aside from demonstrating that such support must have resulted at least in part from widespread literacy and a tradition of political activism..." which indicates the author does find some of Drescher's views convincing because he demonstrated something. Hence superficially convincing.

Would E be correct if it said, "partially convincing"?

[viviannhernandezs@gmail.com]

I picked E because the passage says, "Yet, aside from demonstrating that such support must have resulted at least in part from widespread literacy and a tradition of political activism..." which indicates the author does find some of Drescher's views convincing because he demonstrated something. Hence superficially convincing.

Would E be correct if it said, "partially convincing"?

I also had this thought process. Could you please explain?