LSAT 149 – Section 4 – Question 17

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:06

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
PT149 S4 Q17
+LR
+Exp
Weaken +Weak
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
2%
155
B
3%
156
C
5%
158
D
87%
163
E
2%
154
129
141
152
+Easier 147.325 +SubsectionMedium

Meade: People who are injured as a result of their risky behaviors not only cause harm to themselves but, because we all have important ties to other people, inevitably impose emotional and financial costs on others. To protect the interests of others, therefore, governments are justified in outlawing behavior that puts one’s own health at risk.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that, for the purpose of protecting others, governments are justified in outlawing behavior that puts one’s own health at risk. This is based on the fact that people who cause harm to themselves can also impose emotional and financial costs on others with whom they have important ties.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that preventing harm to others is a purpose that justifies restricting behavior that puts one’s own health at risk. The author overlooks the possibility that, despite the harm that one’s own self-harmful behavior might cause to others, there are reasons governments would not be justified in restricting this behavior.

A
Endangering the social ties that one has to other people is itself a harm to oneself.
This simply describes another potential harm that might result from behavior that harms oneself, if such behavior can threaten one’s social ties. This doesn’t suggest governments might not be justified in restricting self-harmful behavior.
B
People who have important ties to others have a personal obligation not to put their own health at risk.
This relates to one’s own personal obligations. But the argument is about what the government is allowed to do.
C
Governments are not justified in limiting an individual’s behavior unless that behavior imposes emotional or financial costs on others.
This isn’t inconsistent with the author’s reasoning. Justification may be limited to those cases in which one’s behavior imposes costs on others. The stimulus describes one of those cases.
D
Preventing harm to others is not by itself a sufficient justification for laws that limit personal freedom.
This shows that the potential harm posed to others cannot, by itself, justify restrictions on one’s behavior.
E
People’s obligation to avoid harming others outweighs their obligation to avoid harming themselves.
This concerns people’s own obligations. But the argument is about what the government is justified in doing.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply