LSAT 114 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q23

LR Question 23 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: If an act of civil disobedience-willfully breaking…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Parallel Reasoning

PRINCIPLE:

Civil disobedience AND Self Interest AND no interest for others ➞ Not justified

Civil disobedience AND required by conscience ➞ Justified

ANALYSIS: There could be infinite ways of showing that something is an act of justified civil disobedience. But we only have one. If the conclusion says “justified” then we must have “required by conscience.”

If the conclusion says “not justified” we must have “Self interest” and “no interest for others.”

___________

1. We could only conclude it was justified if Keisha acted because her conscience required her to. This doesn’t say she did.
2. Acting out of conscience is a sufficient condition for justified civil disobedience but it isn’t a necessary condition. There could be other ways of committing justified civil disobedience even though her conscience didn’t require her to.
3. Close, but this doesn’t tell us that Georgette’s conscience required her to act.
4. CORRECT. Here we go: Georgia acted partly on behalf of others, so we can’t conclude “not justified.” And since her conscience required her to act then we can conclude “justified.” 
5. Similar to B: conscience is a sufficient condition, but it isn’t a necessary condition. It’s possible there is a way to commit justified civil disobedience by another method.