LSAT Explanation PT 22, S4, Q17: Council member: The preservation of individual
LSAT Question Stem
Which one of the following provides a resolution to the apparent inconsistency described by the council member?
Logical Reasoning Question Type
This is a Paradox question.
Correct Answer
The correct answer to this question is D.
LSAT Question Complete Explanation
Let's first analyze the passage and summarize the main points. The council member states that the preservation of individual property rights is important, but property owners are restricted by zoning laws. This presents an apparent inconsistency between the council's commitment to property rights and the restrictive nature of the zoning laws. The question asks us to find a resolution to this inconsistency.
Think of it like this: Imagine a neighborhood where everyone is allowed to paint their house any color they want. While this might seem like a great way to express individuality, it could lead to clashes between neighbors if one person decides to paint their house a very bright, distracting color that others find unappealing. In this case, having some restrictions on house colors might actually help preserve a more harmonious living environment for everyone.
Now, let's examine each answer choice:
a) Property owners are sometimes allowed exemptions from restrictive zoning laws.
- Although this may provide some relief to specific property owners, it doesn't explain how the restrictive zoning laws are consistent with the council's commitment to property rights.
b) It is in the best interest of property owners to maintain current laws in order to prevent an increase in their property taxes.
- This answer choice suggests a potential benefit of the zoning laws, but it doesn't address the inconsistency between the council's commitment to property rights and the restrictive nature of the laws.
c) The city council places less importance on property rights than do property owners.
- Comparing the importance placed on property rights by the city council and property owners is irrelevant to resolving the inconsistency between the council's commitment to property rights and the restrictive zoning laws.
d) An individual's property rights may be infringed upon by other people altering their own property.
- This answer choice provides a resolution to the inconsistency. If allowing unrestricted property alterations could infringe on the rights of others, then the zoning laws actually serve to protect property rights. This makes the zoning laws consistent with the council's commitment to preserving individual property rights.
e) Zoning laws ensure that property rights are not overly extensive.
- This answer choice restates the problem without providing a resolution. It doesn't explain how the restrictive zoning laws can be consistent with the council's commitment to property rights.
Based on our analysis, answer choice (d) is the correct answer, as it resolves the inconsistency between the council's commitment to property rights and the restrictive nature of the zoning laws by showing that the laws actually serve to protect those rights.