Most people acknowledge that not all governments have a moral right to govern and that there are sometimes morally legitimate reasons for disobeying the law, as when a particular law prescribes behavior that is clearly immoral. ██ ██ ████ ████████ ████████ ████ ████ █████ ███ ███████ ██████████ ███ █████ ██ ████████ ███ ████ ████ █████████ ██ ███████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ █ ██████ ██ ████ ██ ██████ ██████ ███ ███ █████ ███ █████ ██ █████████ ████ █ █████ ████ ██ ████ █ ███ ██████ ███████ ██ ██ ███ ████ ███
Most people's perspective ·Moral duty to obey law because it's law; some rare exceptions
Commentators' perspective ·Reject PA because PA has 2 implications that are absurd
PA allegedly implies (1) all governments are morally equal, and (2) people are morally allowed to do whatever they want (kill people, commit fraud, etc.)
Deny implication 2 ·PA doesn't have to think people can do whatever they want
People still have moral duties not to harm others (a duty that doesn't stem from law). Also, There's a moral duty to help others, which might justify supporting government policies/actions. And, there's a moral duty to follow laws if failing to follow them leads to harm.
Passage Style
Critique or debate
27.
In the passage, the author █████ █████████ ██
Question Type
Implied
Purpose of passage
The author’s purpose in writing this Critique passage is to present one group’s criticisms of a particular theory, and then defend that theory against the criticisms.
a
describe the development ███ ███████████ █████████████ ██ █ ██████████ ██████
Even if we concede that the author describes the “theoretical underpinnings” of PA, he never describes the theory’s development. We have no idea where it came from or how it might have developed.
b
establish that a ██████████ ██████ ████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ██████ █████
The commentators argue that PA’s implications are “counterintuitive.” The author rejects this argument, saying that PA doesn’t conflict with common sense in the ways that the commentators claim. But he isn’t primarily seeking to establish that PA conforms to common sense; he’s just seeking to defend the theory.
c
argue that two █████████ ████████████ ██ █ ██████████ ██████ ███ ███████ ██████████
The commentators argue that PA has two problematic implications. The author rejects this claim, but not by arguing that the implications are morally acceptable. Instead, he defends PA by arguing that it doesn’t necessitate these implications at all.
The commentators criticize PA by arguing that it has two counterintuitive implications. The author seeks to defend PA by showing that it actually does not have these implications. He spends P2 and P3 showing that the commentators’ arguments are mistaken.
The author never suggests that the philosophical anarchists are aware of the theory’s defects. Instead, he defends the theory by showing that it does not entail the two implications that the commentators attribute to it.
Difficulty
87% of people who answer get this correct
This is a moderately difficult question.
It is somewhat easier than other questions in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%139
147
75%156
Analysis
Implied
Purpose of passage
Critique or debate
Law
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
2%
151
b
5%
160
c
4%
155
d
87%
164
e
2%
151
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.