LSAT 118 – Section 3 – Question 23

LSAT 118 - Section 3 - Question 23

December 2004

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

Target time: 1:13

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
PT118 S3 Q23
+LR
+Exp
Argument part +AP
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
A
3%
160
B
5%
161
C
2%
160
D
88%
167
E
3%
162
131
143
155
 +Medium 146.785 +SubsectionMedium

Some vegetarians have argued that there are two individually sufficient reasons for not eating meat—one based on health considerations, and the other based on the aversion to living at the expense of other conscious creatures. But suppose that eating meat were essential to good health for humans. Then it would be less clear that an aversion to living at the expense of other conscious creatures is enough of a reason to stop eating meat.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author takes on a claim by vegetarians that there are two individually sufficient reasons for not eating meat. The author presents a hypothetical that would make it unclear if the second reason is actually individually sufficient. If eating meat is essential to good health, it becomes unclear if empathy for other conscious creatures is a sufficient reason to not eat meat.

Identify Argument Part
This is a hypothetical premise used to demonstrate that it is not clear if an aversion to living at the expense of other conscious creatures is a sufficient reason to stop eating meat.

A
It is used to disprove the vegetarian position that we should not eat meat.
This inaccurately identifies the position being disputed. The author is weakening the idea that there are two individually sufficient reasons for not eating meat, not that we should avoid meat.
B
It is used to show that the two types of reasons cited in favor of vegetarianism are independent.
The supposition actually shows that the two types of reasons are somewhat dependent. The second reason doesn’t hold up as well if the first reason is failed. Therefore, they are interconnected.
C
It is used to disprove the claim that a vegetarian diet is healthy.
The author is presenting a hypothetical premise, not actually disputing the health of vegetarianism.
D
It is used to weaken the claim that the consciousness of animals is a sufficient reason for not eating meat.
By presenting this supposition, the individual strength of this reason for not eating meat is weakened. It shows that this reason may not be completely sufficient.
E
It is used to show that there is no sufficient reason for not eating meat.
The author is weakening one of two potentially sufficient reasons. The first reason remains sufficient in this argument.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 118 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply