LSAT 105 – Section 4 – Question 07

LSAT 105 - Section 4 - Question 07

February 1999

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:44

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT105 S4 Q07
+LR
Strengthen +Streng
A
2%
153
B
0%
170
C
2%
163
D
0%
145
E
96%
166
124
134
144
 +Easiest 144.839 +SubsectionEasier

Willett: Lopez and Simmons, a married couple, have both been offered jobs at Evritech Corporation. Because Evritech has a rule against hiring more than one member of the same family, Lopez and Simmons have decided to reveal their marriage to Evritech. Their decision is foolish, however, since it will mean that one of them will have a job offer withdrawn. After all, they could easily keep their marriage secret initially and, if they want, later claim to have married after they were hired: Evritech has no policy of terminating one of two employees who marry each other.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Lopez and Simmons were foolish to reveal their marriage to Evritech. This is because one of them will lose their job offer due to the reveal, and they could’ve simply kept their marriage a secret until after they were hired.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes either that it wouldn’t have been wrong, in a moral or professional sense, for Lopez and Simmons to have hidden their marriage and lied about getting married after being hired, or that the problematic aspects of lying are outweighed by the fact Lopez and Simmons would’ve both been hired. The author also assumes that because Evritech doesn’t have a policy of terminating one of two employees who marry each other, Evritech doesn’t have a policy of terminating both employees.

A
Corporations that have rules against hiring more than one member of the same family should also prohibit their employees from marrying one another.
We have no idea what corporations should do. We care about what Lopez and Simmons should’ve done.
B
Corporations should adopt a policy of refusing to hire more than one member of the same family if that policy promotes overall fairness in its hiring practices.
Like (A), we’re not interested in what corporations should do. We care about what Lopez and Simmons should’ve done.
C
Job applicants are no more entitled to withhold information that is requested on application forms than they are entitled to lie on such application forms.
We have no idea how entitled Lopez and Simmons were to withhold information or lie. We have no idea if such information was ever requested.
D
Job candidates should refuse to accept positions in corporations whose personnel policies they cannot adhere to.
The author says Simmons and Lopez should’ve taken the positions.
E
Job candidates have no obligation to reveal to a prospective employer personal information such as marital status, regardless of the employer’s policies.
Simmons and Lopez weren’t wrong to withhold their marital status. This strengthens the author’s claim that Simmons and Lopez should’ve withheld their marital status by removing one possible problem of doing so.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 105 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply