QUESTION TYPE: Main Conclusion
CONCLUSION: We shouldn’t fully condemn Hogan’s actions.
REASONING: Hogan thought that Winters was the robber.
ANALYSIS: Basically, Hogan really, really hurt Winters. But he did so because he thought Winters was the robber. So the argument asks us to partially excuse Hogan due to his honest motives.
- This goes too far. Hogan is responsible, but we should show some leniency because Hogan had good motives.
- No. Hogan is responsible. But the fact that Hogan thought Winters was the robber means that Hogan’s violent attack wasn’t merely psychopathic.
- CORRECT. We can give Hogan some credit because he thought he was wounding a criminal, rather than an innocent man.
- This is true, but its just information that supports the conclusion that we shouldn’t fully condemn Hogan’s violent actions.
- The argument only said the actions were reprehensible other things equal. But other things aren’t equal: Hogan should be partially excused because he thought Winters was the robber.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly