QUESTION TYPE: Principle
SITUATION: Some customers incorrectly believed their coupons had expired. This was because the company screwed up. The situation was unfair.
PRINCIPLE: If you cause an unfair situation, you must fix the results of that situation.
ANALYSIS: This question tests your precision. The principle tells you one thing. “If you make a bad situation, fix it”.
All the wrong answers talk about totally different things. Don’t pick an answer because it sounds “reasonable”. The answer has to relate to the one thing that the principle tells you.
We know that Thimble created an unfair situation. So according to the principle, Thimble must pay. This is a quick way to eliminate answers – anything that says Thimble doesn’t need to pay is wrong.
- Nonsense. We’re looking for an answer that forces Thimble to rectify the situation. This answer tells Thimble not to give rebates.
- This answer is about how to assign blame. The principle doesn’t tell us how to assign blame. It tells us what Thimble should do if they are guilty.
- CORRECT. This fits with the principle. There’s a chance that these consumers failed to get the rebate because of Thimble’s mistake. So according to the principle, Thimble must try to rectify the unfair result by giving rebates to anyone who might have missed out.
- This is insane. Thimble made a promise to give a discount. Rather than tell Thimble to fix the situation, this answer tells Thimble to break their promise, to all consumers. That’s very unfair.
- There might be other situations that obligate Thimble to offer a rebate. If someone was unfairly denied a rebate due to ethnic or religious background, then perhaps Thimble is obligated to offer a rebate in that situation too.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly