#2 - Some political thinkers hope to devise a form of

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (D)

The initial statement of this stimulus introduces an assertion to be refuted: “Some political thinkers
hope to devise a form of government in which every citizen’s rights are respected.” In typical LSAT
fashion, in the next statement the author concludes that such a form of government is impossible to
achieve. The author then provides bases for this conclusion.

The first premise is that any government is defined by and controlled by laws that determine its
powers and limits. The second premise is that some will interpret these laws to afford themselves
a greater share of political power than others possess. In other words, there will be laws, and some
people will interpret those laws to gain a power advantage, and therefore, the author concludes, it is
impossible to achieve a form of government wherein all citizens’ rights are respected:

• Premise: Any government is defi ned and controlled by its laws and powers.
  
  Premise: Some will interpret such laws to maximize their own political power.
  
  Conclusion: It is impossible to create a form of government in which every citizen’s rights
  are respected.

We are asked to identify an assumption required by the conclusion. Since there is a leap from the
idea that there will be inevitable power inequity to the conclusion that there cannot be a society
where all citizens’ rights are respected, the Supporter Assumption required by the argument will link
the referenced power advantage with the inability to form a government which respects the rights of
all. To prephrase this supporter assumption, we must look for an answer choice that refl ects the idea
that inequitable distribution of political power invariably leads to the failure to respect some citizens’
rights.

Answer choice (A): If any form of government that leads to unequal power distribution will surely
violate the rights of the majority of citizens, this answer choice would certainly justify the conclusion
in the stimulus, but it is not an assumption that is required in order to properly draw the conclusion.
That is, we don’t need to assume that the majority of citizens’ rights will be violated as a result of
the referenced power inequity—only that the rights of some will be disrespected—in order for the
author’s conclusion to be properly drawn. To confirm, we can always apply the assumption negation
technique, to determine whether the negated answer choice will weaken the stimulus:

• “In any form of government with unequal power distribution, the rights of the majority of
  citizens will not be violated.”

If the rights of the majority will not be violated, this doesn’t weaken the conclusion in the stimulus,
so we know that this is not an assumption on which that argument depends.

Answer choice (B): Keeping citizens ignorant of the laws may prevent the citizens from knowing
when their rights are not being respected, but that is entirely different from not having their rights
respected at all. This answer choice does not link the rogue elements of the argument by expressing
a connection between unequal distribution of political power and failure to respect the rights of all
citizens. As such, this choice is irrelevant to the justifi cation of the conclusion in the stimulus, so
this cannot be the correct answer choice. To check our work, we can apply the Assumption Negation
Technique to determine whether the negated form of this answer choice has any weakening effect on
the conclusion in the stimulus:

• “A government cannot ensure that every citizen’s rights are respected by keeping the citizens
  ignorant of the laws.”

Since the above assertion would not weaken the conclusion in the stimulus, it is confirmed that this
answer choice does not provide an assumption on which the author’s conclusion relies.

Answer choice (C): This answer choice basically says that there are some laws that cannot be
misinterpreted. This is not really relevant to the argument in the stimulus. One of the author’s
premises is that a nation’s laws will invariably be interpreted to afford some with more power than
others, but the author doesn’t assert that this requires misinterpretation, so this answer choice doesn’t
come into play and should be eliminated. To check our work, we can always apply the Assumption
Negation Technique to determine the effects of the negated version of the answer choice:

• “All the laws that defi ne a government’s power can be misinterpreted.”

This assertion would not weaken the argument in the stimulus at all, so we can confirm that this
answer choice does not provide an assumption on which the argument relies.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice, as it links the rogue elements referenced
above:

• Premise: A government is defined by its laws.
  
  Premise: These laws will be interpreted to give some greater power.
  
  Assumption: This uneven power distribution will violate some citizens’ rights.
  
  Conclusion: Therefore, it is impossible to create a form of government in which everyone’s
  rights are respected.

With the assumption that there is always a violation of rights that comes with uneven distribution
of power, the author’s conclusion is properly drawn, reflecting the concepts prephrased in the
discussion above.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice deals with the continuing effects of the power inequity
referenced in the stimulus. While this assumption would make the power disparity greater, this
answer choice does not assert that the acquired political power has anything to do with the failure to
respect the rights of all citizens. Because there is no such connection between power inequities and
respecting other’s rights, this cannot be the supporter assumption we seek.