LSAT 66, Logical Reasoning I, Q7, LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Mike: Tom did not tell me that…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Strengthen

CONCLUSION: It would not be wrong for me to use Tom’s computer.

REASONING: Tom didn’t say I could. But last week he used Mary’s bicycle without asking.

ANALYSIS: We don’t know if it was ‘not wrong’ for Tom to use Mary’s bicycle.

We need a principle that shows you can treat people the same way they treat others.

___________

1. Mike didn’t say anything about theft. He wants to prove that it would ‘not be wrong’ to use Tom’s computer. That’s different from stealing Tom’s computer. (Heck, for the purposes of this argument, we don’t know if theft is wrong)
2. Mike isn’t talking about lying to Tom. He’s just talking about doing something without checking for permission first.
3. Tom didn’t use Mike’s property. He used Mary’s property.
4. CORRECT. Mike is treating Tom the way Tom treated Mary, so therefore Mike’s actions are permissible and not wrong.
5. This provides a sufficient condition for showing something is wrong. We’re trying to show that Mike’s use is not wrong.

LawHub Order

LawHub Order

---