Question

Which one of the following statements concerning the reason for the end of allotment, if true, would provide the most support for the author's view of politicians? (A) Politicians realized that allotment was damaging the Native American way of life. (B) Politicians decided that allotment would be more congruent with the Native American custom of communal land use. (C) Politicians believed that allotment's continuation would not enhance their opportunities to exercise patronage. (D) Politicians felt that the staff and budgets of the BIA had grown too large. (E) Politicians were concerned that too much Native American land was falling into the hands of non-Native Americans.

Short answer

The answer is C.

Step-by-step solution

Understand the Question

The question asks which statement, if true, would most support the author's view of politicians regarding the reason for the end of allotment policy concerning Native Americans. We need to find the option that aligns with a potential critical view of politicians.

Analyze Each Statement

Review each option to understand what belief about politicians it might reflect: A) Suggests empathy and concern for Native Americans. B) Indicates a cultural sensitivity towards Native practices. C) Implies self-interest and focus on political gain rather than the wellbeing of Native Americans. D) Suggests concern over government expenditure and size. E) Indicates altruistic concern for protecting Native American land ownership.

Identify the Critical View of Politicians

A critical view of politicians would suggest that their actions are driven more by self-interest and political gain rather than altruistic motives. Thus, we look for the statement that aligns with this viewpoint.

Select the Best Supporting Statement

Option C (Politicians believed that allotment's continuation would not enhance their opportunities to exercise patronage) aligns with a critical view, as it suggests that the decision to end allotment was made because it didn't serve politicians' self-interests rather than out of concern for the Native Americans.

Key concepts

Logical Reasoning

Logical reasoning is the ability to analyze a situation and draw a conclusion based on available information. When facing a question like the LSAT problem about politicians and the end of allotment, logical reasoning involves carefully considering each option and determining which one most supports the author's view.
Identifying key details in each statement helps. Weighing them against the core argument helps as well. Look for clues that indicate relationship or causality. Ask yourself:

• Does the option address the "why" or "how" behind the action?
• Is it based on the author's insinuations about politicians being self-serving?

Logical reasoning often requires disregarding sympathetic or seemingly noble motives if the core argument suggests cynicism. Practice this process to sharpen your ability for quick and accurate analysis.

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking involves evaluating information meticulously to form a sound judgment, especially in situations where one must discern the truth amidst conflicting information. In the context of the exercise, it's about peeling back the layers of what each statement suggests about political motives.
Critical thinking means:

• Recognizing biases in statements or arguments.
• Identifying the underlying assumptions that guide political decisions—are they self-interested or altruistic?
• Comparing the intent of each statement against what you know about political behavior.

This process allows one to challenge assumptions and find deeper meaning, especially when statements could easily appear valid or attractive at face value.

Decision Making

Decision making in terms of LSAT questions involves selecting the most logical conclusion from a set of options. The decision is informed by logical reasoning and critical thinking skills, ensuring the most probable or evidentially supported choice is made.
When analyzing which statement best supports the view of politicians:

• Consider all the evidence provided in the options.
• Use logical and critical thinking to narrow down choices to those that align with the author’s likely critical viewpoint.
• Evaluate each option's implications and how they reinforce or detract from this view.

A strong decision-making approach demands both objectivity and creativity to ensure the chosen statement is not only appropriate but substantiates the intention behind the author's argument.

Argument Analysis

Argument analysis is breaking down an argument into components to understand and evaluate it. For LSAT questions like this exercise, it means understanding both the explicit and implicit nuances in each statement about politicians.

• Identify the main point or claim of the author's view about politicians.
• Examine supporting details in the options: which features drive a political decision?
• Determine how external factors might color politicians' motives—are these based on inherent benefits to themselves?
• Evaluate against typical political behaviors suggested by history or common rhetoric.

Argument analysis is crucial for understanding the subtleties of political motivations and testing how well the statement supports the given view.