LSAT 109 – Section 4 – Question 26

LSAT 109 - Section 4 - Question 26

December 2000

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:51

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 Q26
+LR
+Exp
Weaken +Weak
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
Rule-Application +RuleApp
A
2%
153
B
14%
162
C
3%
157
D
81%
168
E
1%
156
145
154
163
 +Harder 150.49 +SubsectionHarder

A member of the British Parliament is reputed to have said, “The first purpose of good social reform is to increase the sum total of human happiness. So, any reform which makes somebody happy is achieving its purpose. Since the reform I propose would make my constituents happy, it is a good social reform.”

Summarize Argument
The member of Parliament claims his proposed social reform is a good one. Why? Because it will make his constituents happy, and since social reform is meant to increase human happiness, any reform must be achieving its purpose if it makes at least one person happy.

Notable Assumptions
The member of Parliament assumes any reform that makes at least one person happy must increase the total happiness of humans, and that any reform is good if it achieves its purpose.

A
Different things make different people happy.
This is fully compatible with the member of Parliament’s argument. By his reasoning, his reform will be good even if it only makes his constituents happy.
B
The proposed reform would make a few people happy, but would not increase the happiness of most other people.
This does not challenge the assumption that a reform will increase total human happiness if it makes at least one person happy. The proposed reform may make some people happy and leave everyone else unaffected, in which case it would be a good reform by his rule.
C
The proposed reform would affect only the member of Parliament’s constituents and would make them happy.
This strengthens the argument. If the only people affected by the reform are those it makes happier, then the proposed reform really does increase human happiness in total.
D
Increasing some people’s happiness might not increase the sum total of human happiness if others are made unhappy.
This challenges a key assumption—that any reform that makes somebody happy must make people happier overall. The proposed reform might decrease total human happiness, even if it pleases the member’s own constituents.
E
Good social reforms usually have widespread support.
This does not say a good reform must be popular. Nowhere does the member of parliament argue his reform would be good because it receives widespread support.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 109 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply