LSAT 159 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q20

LR Question 20 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: It should be illegal to patent an organism’s genes …

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Justify

CONCLUSION: It should be illegal to patent an organism’s genes.

REASONING: Discovering something doesn’t equal inventing it. Plus, exploiting genetic information for profit is selfish and irresponsible.

ANALYSIS: The selfish and irresponsible part is just a tack-on. It’s another reason why patenting genetic information is wrong.

But the main objection is that discovery is not equal to invention. If discovering something is not inventing it, then you cannot patent it.

Since this is a principle justify question you can apply an even simpler test. The answer has to give us a rule which tells you not to allow patents. Only the right answer does this.

You could read literally nothing but the conclusion and nothing but what the answer has told you to do and choose the right answer on that basis and be correct.

___________

1. True, but this just restates part of the argument. It doesn’t justify why people can’t patent it.
2. CORRECT. The whole argument depends on the idea that patents require invention, not mere discovery.
   This allows the author to infer that patenting genes (which are discovered, not invented) should be illegal.
    
   Crucially, this tells us “do not patent”. That was the crux of the conclusion, and this is the only answer to tell us not to patent.
3. Too weak. “Not always” still allows cases where discovery is invention. In this case, discovery cannot equal invention.
    
   More importantly, to be right, the answer has to justify not allowing patents for genes. This answer doesn’t say “do not patent”. It is impossible for an answer to be correct unless it tells us not to patent.
4. This is about profiting from someone else’s invention, not about whether discovering genes counts as invention.
5. The argument never addressed what should happen for real inventions. It only discussed discoveries.