LR Question 23 Explanation
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.”
___________
- We could only conclude it was justified if Keisha acted because her conscience required her to. This doesn’t say she did.
- 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.
- Close, but this doesn’t tell us that Georgette’s conscience required her to act.
- 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.”
- 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.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Hi, I'm Graeme Blake
I run LSAT Hacks, and got a 177 on the LSAT. The single best thing I've ever made is the set of LSAT Mastery seminars. They show you how to think like a 170+ scorer when doing questions. Get them here: Mastery Seminars
I guarantee you'll like them, or you get your money back within 7 days. There's no risk. Check the reviews, people have said they improved within a few days.
---------
Photos and Updates: You can follow me on Instagram here
For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.
