QUESTION TEXT: Widespread use of the Internet has led to an…
QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Justify
CONCLUSION: We should educate people about how to use the internet ethically.
REASONING: The impersonal nature of the internet may make people freer to do morally bad things on the internet.
ANALYSIS: The argument doesn’t tell us what ethical education does. So we have no idea why we should do it. The correct answer gives us a reason.
Note: This question is a bit of an exception to principle/justify questions. Usually, the conclusion is in the form of “should”, and the premises are facts. The answer will say “if those facts are true, we should do the conclusion”. Perhaps because people caught on to that trend, this question doesn’t have a “should” gap.
Note that moral responsibility is, in context, the same thing as morally constrained. A term shift is fine, as long as concepts don’t shift.
- CORRECT. The argument said people lack moral responsibility in their internet activities. This answer says ethical education is likely to help fix that.
- This is really, really vague. Formulating ethical guidelines isn’t the same thing as ethical education.
- This hurts the argument! It suggests that ethical education may backfire.
- Adding a necessary condition almost never strengthens an argument. This suggests there’s no way to constrain ethical violations if those violations don’t lead to direct harm, which hurts the conclusion.
- This talks about guilt. The stimulus was about how we can get people to stop doing bad things.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly