LSAT 65, Logical Reasoning I, Q6, LSATHacks

LR Question 6 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Evan: I am a vegetarian because I believe it is…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle

CONCLUSION: We shouldn’t eat seafood.

REASONING: We don’t know if sea animals can feel pain. We should err on the side of caution, assume sea animals do feel pain, and not eat them.

ANALYSIS: Evan says vegetarians should err on the side of caution. Vegetarians shouldn’t eat seafood until they know for sure that sea animals can’t feel pain.

This means that vegetarians risk being wrong. It’s possible sea animals feel no pain, and it would be alright to eat them. But since there’s some chance that sea animals feel pain, vegetarians should risk being wrong.

The correct answer must say what someone should do, and it should advise that person to err on the side of caution.

Many of the wrong answers don’t even offer advice.

___________

1. CORRECT. This answer errs on the side of caution. We should make sure we pay Farah, even if we risk paying her twice. That’s like making sure we avoid causing sea animals pain, even if we risk needlessly avoiding eating them.
2. This is just common sense, and a statement of fact about the world. It doesn’t tell us what anyone should do. 
3. This answer has nothing to do with erring on the side of caution.
4. Same as C.
5. This is a bad argument. It’s possible Allende writes joyful characters because that joy is missing from her own life. In any case, this has nothing to do with erring on the side of caution.

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.