LR Question 19 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: One should not intentionally misrepresent another person…
QUESTION TYPE: Principle
PRINCIPLE: Should Intentionally misrepresent other’s view (M) ➞ Purpose is to act in interest of other (P)
Contrapositive: P ➞ M
ANALYSIS: Principle questions make me angry. I’m angry at you right now for reading this. These questions are soooo easy, but people have trouble with them. Gah!
On principle questions, you must focus only on what you can conclude. You can only conclude necessary conditions. So on this question, you can conclude only one thing. If someone is misrepresenting the belief of another, then they should act in that person’s interest. To violate the principle, they would not act in that person’s interest.
So you’re looking for two things:
- Misrepresenting someone else’s beliefs.
- Purpose is not in the interest of that person.
If you get stuck, look at that list of two things. The wrong answer you’re considering is missing one of them. Figure out what it is.
___________
- CORRECT. It’s definitely against someone’s interest to make them look ridiculous. This means that Ann shouldn’t have misrepresented Bruce’s beliefs.
- Claude is acting in Thelma’s interests: he is preventing someone from bothering her. No one likes being bothered.
- John’s purpose appears to be acting for Maria’s interest: he wants people to respect her.
- Harvey is misrepresenting his own beliefs.
- It doesn’t sound like Wanda is misrepresenting George’s beliefs. He knows little about Geography, so maybe he doesn’t know Egypt is in Africa. It’s also not clear Wanda wants to harm George: maybe there is good reason to let people know the truth about his geographical limitations.
Recap: The question begins with “One should not intentionally misrepresent another person”. It is a Principle question. To practice more Principle questions, have a look at the LSAT Questions by Type page.
More Resources for Principle Questions
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Principle questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers principle questions.
Hi,
If Ann knew Bruce did not think (believe) that, then how can that statement suggest that it was Bruce’s belief?
The specific content of Bruce’s beliefs doesn’t really matter. All that matters is that Ann is intentionally misrepresenting Bruce’s beliefs because she knows for certain what he does not think and still tells others that he does indeed hold those beliefs.
It states “One should not intentionally misrepresent another person’s beliefs unless one’s purpose in doing so is to act in the best interest of that other person.” So, how is option A correct?
We’re looking for the answer choice that violates the stated principle.
The principle is:
(1) Should intentionally misrepresent someone’s beliefs –> Acting in that person’s best interests
(2) Contrapositive: ~(Acting in best interests) –> ~(intentionally misrepresent beliefs)
(A) says: Ann misrepresented Bruce’s beliefs and was NOT acting in Bruce’s best interests.
Note how that violates (1), above. (1) says if you’re going to misrepresent someone’s beliefs, you MUST be acting in their best interests. Or, if we look at it from the perspective of the contrapositive (2): If you’re not acting in someone’s best interests (e.g. making someone “look ridiculous”), then you should NOT intentionally misrepresent their beliefs (which she did).
Violates. Ok. Yeah, missing that word makes a big difference. This exam ruthlessly punishes you for missing a word and it has every good reason to do so. I would have never thought to have approached the analysis of this question the way you did — searching out the necessary condition before parsing out the contrapositive. I thought I understood the importance of conditional reasoning and contrapositives but I’m not sure I actually do. Perhaps if I’d read it correctly the first time through, I would have recognized the importance of the necessary condition by connecting that concept with the word ‘violates.’
HAHA love the rant about these questions in general; I think it’s the first time I’ve looked at your explanations for one of them. I just came to check what you had to say about E even though I got this right because I put a ‘?’ next to E because it seemed bizarre to me… you’re right…maybe George is just stupid….or a child who hasn’t learned about geography yet. There’s no clear language indicating she has misrepresented him.