QUESTION TEXT: Marianne is a professional chess player who…
QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Strengthen
CONCLUSION: Mary argued she shouldn’t be forced to stop humming.
REASONING: Mary wasn’t aware she was humming: it was involuntary.
ANALYSIS: The case against Mary seems strong. We need a principle that tells us not to punish involuntary acts.
___________
- We have no evidence that Mary’s opponents hum, so this would still leave them free to complain.
- CORRECT. This does it. Since Mary’s actions aren’t voluntary, the league can’t threaten to disqualify her because of her humming.
- We’re trying to hold Mary not responsible. Also, we don’t know if humming serves her interests.
- This doesn’t help Mary. She’s arguing she isn’t responsible because her actions are involuntary. This would support the idea that her humming is voluntary.
- This tells us when to disqualify a player. It doesn’t help us figure out when not to disqualify a player. In any case, Mary isn’t trying to distract anyone. Her humming is involuntary.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply