LSAT 155 – Section 2 – Question 16

LSAT 155 - Section 2 - Question 16

November 2019

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:23

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
PT155 S2 Q16
+LR
Argument part +AP
Critique or Debate +CritDeb
Problem-Analysis +Prob
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
A
10%
154
B
71%
160
C
5%
153
D
13%
161
E
1%
143
122
142
162
 +Medium 145.934 +SubsectionMedium

Philosopher: Groups are not the type of entity that can be worthy of praise or blame. Blameworthiness implies conscience and agency. Nations do not have consciences. Families are not agents. Hence, any ascription of praise or blame to a group must be translated into some statement about individuals if we are to evaluate it properly.

Summarize Argument
Attributing the quality of praise or blame to a group must be translated into a statement about individuals. Why? Because groups cannot be worthy of praise or blame. Blameworthiness requires conscience and agency. Nations and families, for example, possess neither of these qualities.

Identify Argument Part
The claim in the third sentence is used as support for a sub-conclusion, which supports the Philosopher’s main conclusion.

A
It is an intermediate conclusion offered as direct support for the argument’s main conclusion.
The claim is not a sub-conclusion. The claim is used as support for a sub-conclusion in the Philosopher’s argument.
B
It is offered as support for an intermediate conclusion that is in turn offered as direct support for the argument’s main conclusion.
The claim supports a sub-conclusion in the Philosopher’s argument.
C
It is cited as an implication of the main conclusion drawn in the argument.
The claim is not an implication the Philosopher is inferring. The claim is stated as fact.
D
It is cited as an instance of a general conclusion drawn in the argument.
The claim does not directly support the Philosopher’s main conclusion.
E
It is the main conclusion drawn in the argument.
The claim is not the Philosopher’s main conclusion.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 155 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply