LSAT Hacks

The Explanations That Should Have Come With The LSAT

  • Start Here
    • About
  • LSAT Explanations
  • LSATHacks Pro
  • Course
  • Mastery seminars
  • Tutoring
  • Books
  • Login
LSAT Explanations » LSAT Preptest 74 » Logical Reasoning 2 » Question 14

LSAT 74, Logical Reasoning II, Q14

LSAT 74 Explanations

LR Question 14 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Journalist: It is unethical for journalists to lie—to…

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: It’s wrong to say that withholding information is as bad as lying.

REASONING: Lying gives people wrong beliefs. Withholding information only allows a new false belief to form.

ANALYSIS: The journalist makes a somewhat valid distinction. Withholding info does seem less bad than outright lying.

The method of argument is to show a distinction between two concepts and show that one (withholding info) is ok based on that distinction.

___________

  1. CORRECT. This matches. See especially the sentence that starts with “however”. The journalist says that critics fail to see the difference between lying and merely withholding information. Both are similar, but this key difference means only lying is wrong.
  2. Not so. This describes a situation where others are attacking a distinction. But in this argument, the author is criticizing those who didn’t see a distinction at all. The author makes a new argument that there is a distinction that everyone missed.
  3. The journalist defines two terms: lying, and withholding information.
  4. Gad, this is complex. It has nothing to do with the passage. I’ve made a parallel argument below to show what this answer would look like.
    Example of answer: You say it’s always right to tell the truth. This therefore proves you should have handed your brother over to the police.
    But in some cases, the truth can kill people from shock. For instance, my uncle Harris died when he learned his son gained his fortune by fraud. Therefore, the truth is not always good, and that principle cannot support your argument that you should turn in your brother.
  5. The journalist didn’t give examples of when withholding information is allowed and when it isn’t. So there was no clarification of this moral principle by examples.

Previous Question
Table Of Contents
Next Question




Free Logical Reasoning lesson

Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

I run LSAT Hacks, and got a 177 on the LSAT. The single best thing I've ever made is the set of LSAT Mastery seminars. They show you how to think like a 170+ scorer when doing questions. Get them here: Mastery Seminars

I guarantee you'll like them, or you get your money back within 7 days. There's no risk. Check the reviews, people have said they improved within a few days.
---------
Photos and Updates: You can follow me on Instagram here

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.

Comments

  1. Harrison says

    February 3, 2016 at 1:46 am

    Your explanation is entirely inconsistent. Why should the usage of the word “cases” being compared in choice E imply usage of examples while the usage of “cases” being compared in choice A does not? This is inadequate, sloppy, and unhelpful for prep. Surprising, really.

    A better explanation of E would probably include a discussion of whether the journalist is in fact “defending a moral principle” rather than commenting on it.

    Reply
    • FounderGraeme says

      May 16, 2016 at 7:20 am

      This isn’t correct, actually.

      The journalist is defending the following moral principle: “lying is wrong, including witholding information”

      There is no case given where that doesn’t apply. So E doesn’t match.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Free LSAT Email Course

My best LSAT tips, straight to your inbox


New! LSATHacks Pro: Get every course on LSATHacks for $49.99/month

LSATHacks Pro

LSAT Course, LSAT Mastery seminars, and 3,000 extra explanations. All for $49.99/month, satisfaction guaranteed, no minimum commitment. Sign up here: https://lsathacks.com/lsathacks-pro/

Testimonials

Your emails are tremendously helpful. - Matt

Thanks for the tips! They were very helpful, and even make you feel like you studied a bit. Great insight and would love more! - Haj

Dear Graeme: MUCH MORE PLEASE!! Your explanations are very clear, and you give equal importance to why answers are WRONG, as well as why THE ANSWER is right!! Very well done. Thank you for all your efforts - Tom

These have been awesome. More please!!! - Caillie

The course was immensely helpful and has eased my nerves a lot. - Lovlean

© Copyright 2022 LSAT Hacks. All Rights Reserved. | FAQ/Legal

Disclaimer: Use of this site requires official LSAT preptests; the explanations are of no use without the preptests. If you do not have the accompanying preptests, you can find them here: LSAT preptests
LSAT is copyright of LSAC. LSAC does not review or endorse specific test preparation materials or services and has not reviewed this site.
×
Item Added to your Cart!
There are no products
Continue Shopping