LSAT Principle and Parallel Reasoning 5

Question 1

A principle holds: 'Public officials should recuse themselves from decisions in which they have a personal financial stake.' Alderman Torres argues she need not recuse herself from a vote on a downtown development project. Which fact best supports her position?

Accepted Answer

Torres sold her stake in a business near the development site before the vote was scheduled.

Answer

If Torres divested her financial interest before the vote, she no longer has a personal financial stake, so the principle's recusal condition is not triggered.

Question 2

Which of the following arguments most closely parallels the structure of: 'If a law is unjust, citizens are morally permitted to disobey it. This tax law is unjust. Therefore, citizens are morally permitted to disobey this tax law'?

Accepted Answer

If a contract is fraudulent, it is void. This contract is fraudulent. Therefore, this contract is void.

Answer

Both arguments apply a conditional rule (If P then Q) to a case where P is true, and validly conclude Q — option A mirrors this modus ponens structure precisely.

Question 3

Ethicist: 'We are obligated to prevent great harm when we can do so at little cost to ourselves. Donating $50 to famine relief can save a child's life and costs me little. Therefore, I am obligated to donate.' A critic objects that this principle would require constant sacrifice since there is always suffering to prevent. This objection is best described as:

Accepted Answer

A reductio ad absurdum showing the principle has unacceptable implications if consistently applied.

Answer

The critic extends the principle to its logical extreme to show it demands constant sacrifice, a reductio strategy that challenges the principle's acceptability.

Question 4

Principle: 'A business practice is deceptive if it creates a false impression in the mind of a reasonable consumer, regardless of whether any statement made is technically false.' An advertiser claims its practice is not deceptive. Which finding best supports the advertiser's claim?

Accepted Answer

A survey finds that no reasonable consumer came away with a false impression from the advertisement.

Answer

The principle hinges on whether a false impression was created in a reasonable consumer's mind; survey evidence that no such impression arose directly negates the principle's condition.

Question 5

Which of the following most accurately identifies the flaw in this reasoning: 'No one complained about the construction noise last month. Therefore, the construction noise did not bother anyone last month'?

Accepted Answer

Treating the absence of complaints as proof that no dissatisfaction existed.

Answer

The argument assumes that people who are bothered will always complain, ignoring reasons why bothered individuals might stay silent, which is an argument from silence fallacy.

LSAT - Law School Admission Test Practice Test

LSAT - Law School Admission Test Practice Test

LSAT Principle and Parallel Reasoning 5