QUESTION TEXT: Libel is defined as damaging the reputation…
QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Justify
CONCLUSION: Libel laws can make it hard for public figures to have a good reputation.
REASONING: Strong libel laws make it unlikely anyone will say bad things about public figures.
ANALYSIS: This is almost like a paradox situation. When you’re presented with a confusing situation, you should ask: how could this be true?
- My first thought was that maybe people only find public figures trustworthy if there are some minor bad things said about those public figures.
- Or maybe people only find someone trustworthy in relation to others. We need some people to be badly attacked; this helps us trust the remaining people who haven’t been publicly attacked.
It turns out the right answer uses the second version. But the point of the “how could this be true?” exercise isn’t necessarily to identify the answer in advance (though that helps!). The exercise can also make your mind think actively about the relevant factors, and make you receptive to the right answer even if you hadn’t thought of it in advance.
___________
- The argument isn’t about what happens without libel law. It’s about what happens if we do have libel law!
We can’t learn much from the opposite extreme. I.e. Experience of deserts doesn’t tell us what life is like in the arctic. - The question wasn’t about bad reputations. It was about whether anyone could get a good reputation.
- This tells us about what should be libel. But the stimulus was about what would happen if there are libel laws.
- This is a trap. If you picked this, you might have thought: “Oh, all those proven negative statements will surely damage reputations”
But the conclusion isn’t about bad reputations. It’s about how nobody can form a good reputation. (Not every public figure is subject to attacks.) - CORRECT. This answer says:
No bad reputations ➞ no good reputationsThe stimulus said that no one would attack public figures if there were strong libel laws. You must take LSAT answers literally. If they say no one, they mean 0% of people.
So there are no negative attacks. People presumably can’t get negative reputations.
And according to the principle in this answer, that means there are also no good reputations.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply