LSAT 105 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q13

LR Question 13 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: If an artist receives a public subsidy to support …

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: An artist who receives a public subsidy and later becomes financially successful is morally obligated to repay it.

REASONING: The money repaid could be used to support other deserving artists who need subsidies.

ANALYSIS: The reasoning isn’t based on reciprocity or explicit promises. It just argues that you should repay the subsidy so others can benefit in the same way.

___________

1. It doesn’t require that the artist benefited from past similar repayments by others. Just that they benefitted from the subsidy at all (no matter the original source of the money).
2. CORRECT. It argues that these artists should act this way so others can receive the same benefit they did.
3. There were no promises involved. It’s a moral obligation.
4. We don’t know anything about the consequences of not paying.
5. There’s no cost-benefit analysis to what paying would mean for the artist. It simply states that paying is morally right because it helps others in the same way they were helped.