#7 - Tanner: The public should demand political debates

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Point at Issue. The correct answer choice is (B)

This stimulus contains an argument between Tanner and Saldana about the value of debates in assessing candidates for office. Tanner contends that the public should be in favor of debates prior to any election as serious debates help voters to determine which candidate is best suited for political office. Saldana responds that the debates do not help voters determine which candidate is better suited for office as debates always benefit the better debater. The question stem asks us to determine where the two speakers disagree. To do this, we need to compare the statements made by each, and determine about what fact or facts they would disagree. We cannot assume that the speakers would believe anything other than what is directly stated in their respective arguments. In this case, it appears as though the speakers disagree as to the value of to voters of political debates.

Answer choice (A): Tanner would not necessarily agree or disagree with this statement. He states that voters will be better able to decide which candidate is best by watching serious debates between them. He does not say if he thinks that debating skill will be the determining factor for voters. It could be that other factors, such as policy positions discussed at the debate, will help the voters decide. Since we do not know if Tanner would agree or disagree with this answer choice, it cannot be correct.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. Tanner would agree with this statement, as he stated that serious debates between candidates help voters to decide which candidate is best suited for office. Saldana would disagree, as she states that debates only help determine which candidate is the better debater, and not which candidate is more qualified. Since the two speakers would disagree as to the truth of this answer choice, it is the correct answer.

Answer choice (C): Neither speaker takes a clear position on this answer choice. Therefore, it cannot be the Point at Issue.

Answer choice (D): This answer choice is another example of an incorrect answer due to lack of information. Tanner does not clearly state if good debating skills make a candidate more qualified for office. Therefore, since we do not know what one speaker believes about this answer choice, it cannot be the point at issue.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice is similar to answer choice (A). Though Tanner states that debates will help voters decide who is more qualified to serve in office, he does not state that the debates actually have an impact on who wins an election. Voters may decide to elect someone they think is less qualified but who has other benefits.

[trentkannegieter]

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but I still don't understand why Tanner has any stance on whether a candidate is the "most qualified" to hold an elected office, as is necessary for answer B to be correct. After all, Tanner says that voters can determine who is "best suited for office" by watching a debate. "Best suited" doesn't have to be the "most qualified." (For example, a three-term incumbent mayor might be the most qualified to win a mayoral election—that kind of experience is hard to beat. However, if that same mayor has taken countless bribes and is generally corrupt, he or she might not be the best suited.) Following this, Tanner doesn't have an opinion on whether a debate helps us pick the most qualified candidate - it only helps us pick the best fit. Any assistance for what my error was in crossing out B would be greatly appreciated!

[Jeremy Press]

Hi Trent,

This is a very good question! What it boils down to is whether "qualified" and "suited" can reasonably be construed as synonyms (note: we're looking for the answer that is "most" supported by the dialogue). LSAC thinks they can, for what I would argue is relatively good (certainly good enough) reason. Merriam-Webster includes as a synonym of "qualified" the term "suitable" (both are given the definition "having the required skills for an acceptable level of performance"), which is a close cousin of this question's usage of the term "suited." Indeed, Collins has "suited" as a synonym for "suitable" in a number of the senses of "suitable." I grant you that suited can in certain instances shade more toward "proper" or "fitting" than toward "meeting requirements." But do we know for sure that this somewhat flexible term must necessarily be construed that way here? No. Your new hypothetical, which I'd caution you against using as a yardstick for this Family 1 question, is one about which we cannot know the two speakers' views.

What's going on here is something I often warn my students about: if you allow that a reasonable argument exists that the terms can be construed as synonymous (certainly Saldana treats them that way), then answer choice B becomes the best choice by far. That is particularly true in this question, where (as is well-explained in the original post) none of the other answer choices have any argument in their favor.

I hope this helps!

Jeremy