LSAT 109 – Section 4 – Question 19

LSAT 109 - Section 4 - Question 19

December 2000

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

Target time: 1:21

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
PT109 S4 Q19	+LR +Exp	Weaken +Weak Conditional Reasoning +CondR Rule-Application +RuleApp Value Judgment +ValJudg	A 1% 155 B 78% 168 C 7% 161 D 2% 159 E 13% 160	146 155 163	+Harder	150.49 +SubsectionHarder

Speaker: Contemporary business firms need to recognize that avoiding social responsibility leads to the gradual erosion of power. This is Davis and Blomstrom’s Iron Law of Responsibility: “In the long run, those who do not use power in a manner which society considers responsible will tend to lose it.” The law’s application to human institutions certainly stands confirmed by history. Though the “long run” may require decades or even centuries in some instances, society ultimately acts to reduce power when society thinks it is not being used responsibly. Therefore, a business that wishes to retain its power as long as it can must act responsibly.

Summarize Argument

The speaker concludes that businesses should use power responsibly in order to hold that power as long as possible. Why? Because according to history and the “Iron Law of Responsibility,” society will eventually act to disempower institutions it thinks are misusing power.

Notable Assumptions

The speaker assumes that a business must act responsibly in order for society to view it as responsible. She also assumes that when society tries to disempower an irresponsible business, it will have success. In addition, she assumes using power responsibly will not prevent a business from reaching the “long run.”

Government institutions are as subject to the Iron Law of Responsibility as business institutions.

This doesn’t mean businesses are exempt from that rule. This supports expanding the speaker’s argument to government institutions, but does not weaken her argument relating to businesses.

Public relations programs can cause society to consider an institution socially responsible even when it is not.

This challenges the speaker’s assumption that a business must act responsibly in order to be viewed as responsible. It implies businesses can hold their power by acting irresponsibly but maintaining good public relations.

The power of some institutions erodes more slowly than the power of others, whether they are socially responsible or not.

This is an irrelevant distinction between institutions. The speed of that erosion is not important to the speaker’s argument, because she admits the “long run” is different in each case.

Since no institution is eternal, every business will eventually fail.

This is fully compatible with the speaker’s argument. She explains how businesses should act to remain powerful as long as they can—she does not imply they can retain power forever.

Some businesses that have used power in socially responsible ways have lost it.

The speaker does not say that socially responsible businesses will last forever. She states only that social responsibility will maximize the time a business has power.

LSAT 109 – Section 4 – Question 19

LSAT 109 - Section 4 - Question 19

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 109 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel