LSAT 31, Logical Reasoning II, Q16, LSATHacks

LR Question 16 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Ethicist: Some would ban cloning on the grounds…

QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument

CONCLUSION: We should not ban cloning merely on the grounds that the clones would exist to indulge the vanity of their “originals”.

REASONING: It is not illegal to use someone as a vehicle for your own ambitions. Some people push their children to achieve in academia or athletics. You do not have to be born in a test tube to be an extension of someone’s ego. 

ANALYSIS: The statement in question supports the ethicist’s argument. Their point is that vanity alone is not enough of a reason to ban cloning.

___________

1. The ethicist isn’t claiming that society does not value individuality. Indeed, the ethicist argues that many people view even their own children as mere extensions of their individuality. 
2. The main conclusion is about cloning. Academic success is just an example.
3. Oddly, the ethicist might agree that clones are subpeople. They don’t express a firm opinion on this point. 
4. CORRECT. Lots of activities are vain but we don’t ban them merely because they are vain. 
5. The ethicist is arguing against banning cloning. 

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.