LSAT Explanation PT 23, S3, Q3: Historian: The central claim of the

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following can be most reasonably inferred from the historian's statements? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Most Strongly supported question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is A. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

This LSAT problem presents a passage where a historian criticizes the "end-of-history" theory, arguing that it is impossible to stand outside all of history to judge whether history is really at an end. The question type for this problem is Most Strongly Supported (MSS), and we are asked to identify which of the answer choices can be most reasonably inferred from the historian's statements.

To better understand the historian's argument, let's consider an analogy. Imagine a runner who claims to have reached the finish line of a race, but the race is ongoing and the finish line is constantly moving. It would be impossible for the runner to know for sure that they have reached the final finish line because they are still part of the race. Similarly, the historian is arguing that we cannot know for certain whether history has reached its final stage of development since we are still part of history.

Now, let's analyze each answer choice:

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. It captures the main idea of the historian's argument that we cannot know for sure whether the end-of-history theory is true. While the wording may not be perfect, it is the best choice among the given options.

Answer choice (B): The historian's argument does not focus on the ideological understanding of history by the advocates of the end-of-history theory. Instead, the argument is about our inability to know whether the theory is true. This choice is not a reasonable inference from the historian's statements.

Answer choice (C): This choice contradicts the historian's argument, which states that it is impossible to know whether the end-of-history theory is true. Therefore, this choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (D): The historian's argument is about our inability to know whether the end-of-history theory is true, not about the impossibility of the theory itself. This choice incorrectly conflates the lack of proof for a proposition with proof against it, and is therefore incorrect.

Answer choice (E): The historian does not assert that ideological developments are the essential elements of history; this is a belief held by the proponents of the end-of-history theory. This choice is not a reasonable inference from the historian's statements.

In conclusion, the most reasonable inference from the historian's statements is answer choice (A): We can never know whether the end-of-history theory is true.