LSAT Explanation PT 24, S3, Q26: Columnist on the arts: My elected

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most supports the columnist's argument? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Principle question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The columnist states that elected government representatives were within their rights to vote to support the arts with tax dollars (premise). However, some artists have produced works of art that are morally or aesthetically offensive to many taxpayers. Despite this, the columnist concludes that no taxpayers have been treated unjustly whose tax dollars are used to fund some particular work of art that they may find abominable (conclusion).

To better understand this argument, let's use a simple example. Imagine a group of people contributing money to a common pool to support local artists. Some artists create works that certain individuals in the group find offensive. However, since everyone agreed to contribute money to support the artists, no one has been treated unjustly even if they don't like some of the art produced.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument would be: "Do elected representatives have the authority to decide how tax dollars are spent on behalf of their constituents?"

Now, let's discuss the question type and the answer choices. The question is a Principle question, asking us to identify the principle that most supports the columnist's argument.

a) Taxpayers should be allowed to decide whether a portion of their tax dollars is to be used to fund the arts.

- This answer choice weakens the argument because it implies that taxpayers should have control over how their tax dollars are spent, which goes against the columnist's conclusion.

b) The funding of a particular activity is warranted if it is funded by elected representatives who legitimately fund that activity in general.

- This is the correct answer. It supports the argument by stating that if elected representatives have the authority to fund an activity (in this case, the arts), then the funding of specific instances of that activity (particular works of art) is also justified, even if some taxpayers find them offensive.

c) Elected representatives are within their rights to fund any activity that is supported by a majority of their constituents.

- This answer choice is incorrect because it introduces the idea of majority support, which is not discussed in the passage.

d) Those who resent taxation to subsidize offensive art should vote against their incumbent government representatives.

- This answer choice doesn't address whether taxpayers have been treated unjustly. Instead, it offers a suggestion for those who are unhappy with the funding decisions.

e) Since taxpayers are free to leave their country if they disapprove of their representatives' decisions, they have no right to complain about arts funding.

- This answer choice is incorrect because it focuses on the right to complain, rather than addressing the issue of whether taxpayers have been treated unjustly.

In conclusion, the correct answer is B, as it supports the columnist's argument by connecting the legitimacy of elected representatives funding the arts in general to the specific funding of particular works of art, even if some taxpayers find them offensive.