LSAT 129 – Section 1 – Question 25

LSAT 129 - Section 1 - Question 25

June 2009

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

Target time: 1:12

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
PT129 S1 Q25
+LR
+Exp
Most strongly supported +MSS
Principle +Princ
Rule-Application +RuleApp
A
3%
157
B
7%
158
C
3%
155
D
81%
164
E
6%
159
141
150
160
 +Medium 146.023 +SubsectionMedium

Columnist: It is sometimes claimed that the only factors relevant to determining moral guilt or innocence are the intentions of the person performing an action. However, external circumstances often play a crucial role in our moral judgment of an action. For example, a cook at a restaurant who absentmindedly put an ingredient in the stew that is not usually in the stew would ordinarily be regarded as forgetful, not immoral. If, however, someone eating at the restaurant happens to be severely allergic to that ingredient, eats the stew, and dies, many people would judge the cook to be guilty of serious moral negligence.

Summary

The columnist argues that intentions are not the sole factor in determining moral guilt. For example, a cook who accidentally adds an ingredient would normally be considered forgetful. However, if someone were allergic to the ingredient and died, the cook would be judged guilty of serious negligence.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Factors beyond one’s intentions (immediate control) can influence how one is judged for an action.

A
It is sometimes fair to judge the morality of others’ actions even without considering all of the circumstances under which those actions were performed.

This is anti-supported. The columnist sees the importance of looking at other factors when determining one’s morality.

B
We sometimes judge unfairly the morality of other people’s actions.

This is too strong to support. The stimulus does not mention what is fair/unfair, only that people are judged for things outside of their intentions

C
We should judge all negligent people to be equally morally blameworthy, regardless of the outcomes of their actions.

This is anti-supported. The stimulus suggests that people are judged differently in different situations.

D
People are sometimes held morally blameworthy as a result of circumstances some of which were outside their intentional control.

The example with the cook mirrors this answer choice. Whether one is allergic to an ingredient (outside of the cook’s control) is a major factor in how they are morally judged.

E
The intentions of the person performing an action are rarely a decisive factor in making moral judgments about that action.

This is too strong to support. The columnist suggests that there are factors other than one’s motives, not that their intentions are “rarely a decisive factor.”

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 129 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply