A is a trick answer if you don't slow down and read the question stem. We are asked about the economist. The economists claims, "CEO's sole responsibility is to the owners, whose primary interest, EXCEPT IN CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS, is the protection of their profits.".
He goes on to say CEOs are bound to seek profits for owners. This claim still only refers to institutions which are not charitable institutions.
This is all we learn about the economists take on charitable organizations. Everything else we learn is in reference to noncharitable organizations.
I have been messing around with using the different highlighter colors to mark the first word that introduces a new perspective.
So, for me, the economist POV was orange. I highlighted the question stem with orange and that may be something I do going forward to keep me on task if I stick with this strategy!
I think what rules (A) out it "obligated". CEOs in a charitable organization is not "obligated" to make profit, but they should still maximizing profit so that they can serve better for the public goods.
noooo frrrr lmao, this is so ez when kevin can exlain it. I havnt gotten one wrong due to him quite literally telling us "the answer" before we even get there. My main reason I suck at RC is b/c I cant understand the passage "correctly"
0
[deleted]
Sunday, Jun 22, 2025
@youngj181175 Yeah, I feel the same way. It is nice to see that the actual questions are stupid simple if you truly understand what you read. There really haven't been any trick answers or hard to understand answers like there were in LR yet, and even those would be easier if he had broken down the stimulus before we read the question
I was hesitating between A and B. I chose B since I felt that A was a bit of a stretch. It's only when I read the analysis, I realized that excluding the charitable institutions was explicitly mentioned! This is just a little bit concerning, feels like I might have overlooked other important info that'd result in mistakes. RC you say too much
For further understanding - in the same paragraph where A is shown to be wrong in the explanation, it doesn't explain the part of the paragraph saying "even if such a CEO's purpose is to look at the public good and nothing else, they should still work to maximize profits" and in the sentence before that it is indicate this extends to any instance where the CEO is not obligated to maximize profits. Is the only reason A is wrong then because charities are not explicitly stated as being a part of this? Or just because it is a 'most likely to agree' question and that B is a stronger choice?
@JackSykes I eliminated A because it used "is obligated" instead of "should" because I understood that sentence as saying that even though a CEO is not obligated ... it still should maximize profit. Meaning it has no obligation to, but it still should.
Should I put any emphasis on the difference between "obligated" and "should"? In LR, "should" is a key component of an argument's main conclusion, and it's often found in causal reasoning or non-conditional reasoning. The difference is that "should" is not "must." Where "obligated" is more like "must." I believe I've seen a few LR questions that conclude with an "obligation" which is a strong main conclusion, much stronger than a suggestion, which makes me believe it is more in the "must" or "always" or "necessary" family.
I say this because answer (A)'s point is "obligation" where answer (B) is "should" or a suggestion.
got this right 30 seconds faster than the target because I immediately went with my gut when I saw exactly what I was looking for. Going to continue using this strategy in future RC questions
41 comments
Kevin cannot hide his class consciousness even for a second
I love it so much
The charity call out lmao
Not sure if i am getting this correct quickly because i am lucky or if im getting better.
haha exactly how i feel
rich people tax deductions LMAO!
Im killing it
A is a trick answer if you don't slow down and read the question stem. We are asked about the economist. The economists claims, "CEO's sole responsibility is to the owners, whose primary interest, EXCEPT IN CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS, is the protection of their profits.".
He goes on to say CEOs are bound to seek profits for owners. This claim still only refers to institutions which are not charitable institutions.
This is all we learn about the economists take on charitable organizations. Everything else we learn is in reference to noncharitable organizations.
Hope this helps!
@AnibalCPerez They* (in reference to the economists)
Did anyone else read to quickly and think it was asking what the author would have agreed with?
I have been messing around with using the different highlighter colors to mark the first word that introduces a new perspective.
So, for me, the economist POV was orange. I highlighted the question stem with orange and that may be something I do going forward to keep me on task if I stick with this strategy!
the noncharitable / owner or not owner-owned is giving me a headache lmao
I think what rules (A) out it "obligated". CEOs in a charitable organization is not "obligated" to make profit, but they should still maximizing profit so that they can serve better for the public goods.
these questions are so much easier when you get a 20 min Kevin explanation of every sentence
noooo frrrr lmao, this is so ez when kevin can exlain it. I havnt gotten one wrong due to him quite literally telling us "the answer" before we even get there. My main reason I suck at RC is b/c I cant understand the passage "correctly"
@youngj181175 Yeah, I feel the same way. It is nice to see that the actual questions are stupid simple if you truly understand what you read. There really haven't been any trick answers or hard to understand answers like there were in LR yet, and even those would be easier if he had broken down the stimulus before we read the question
They got me in the first half, but i found my mistake in blind review.
This question was definitely a learning lesson. I was so tired that I accidentally read economists as the author. Sleep deprivation gets to you lol
I don't wanna jinx it but...you know what nevermind.
Finally feel like the LSAT is giving me a break with this section.
I was hesitating between A and B. I chose B since I felt that A was a bit of a stretch. It's only when I read the analysis, I realized that excluding the charitable institutions was explicitly mentioned! This is just a little bit concerning, feels like I might have overlooked other important info that'd result in mistakes. RC you say too much
For further understanding - in the same paragraph where A is shown to be wrong in the explanation, it doesn't explain the part of the paragraph saying "even if such a CEO's purpose is to look at the public good and nothing else, they should still work to maximize profits" and in the sentence before that it is indicate this extends to any instance where the CEO is not obligated to maximize profits. Is the only reason A is wrong then because charities are not explicitly stated as being a part of this? Or just because it is a 'most likely to agree' question and that B is a stronger choice?
@JackSykes I eliminated A because it used "is obligated" instead of "should" because I understood that sentence as saying that even though a CEO is not obligated ... it still should maximize profit. Meaning it has no obligation to, but it still should.
Should I put any emphasis on the difference between "obligated" and "should"? In LR, "should" is a key component of an argument's main conclusion, and it's often found in causal reasoning or non-conditional reasoning. The difference is that "should" is not "must." Where "obligated" is more like "must." I believe I've seen a few LR questions that conclude with an "obligation" which is a strong main conclusion, much stronger than a suggestion, which makes me believe it is more in the "must" or "always" or "necessary" family.
I say this because answer (A)'s point is "obligation" where answer (B) is "should" or a suggestion.
wow these questions are sooo much easier when you know how to break the passage down
Lol I read A and just chose it without looking at the other questions. Now I know
got this right 30 seconds faster than the target because I immediately went with my gut when I saw exactly what I was looking for. Going to continue using this strategy in future RC questions
almost had me SIKE
reread the economist paragraph too fast and got this wrong ;(
I misread the opposite idea (the "But suppose" part) as my answer. I picked my answer too fast eventhough the first sentence literally gave it away
I was stuck between A and B but chose B because i felt like answer choice A was a bit too strong. Its the perfect trap answer though
This is the first ever question that I got right under the recommended time. Usually I am always so over the recommended time!