LSAT 153 | Section 4 | Reading Comprehension: Q17

RC Question 17 Explanation

DISCUSSION: This is extremely similar to question 16. By far the biggest difference between the passages is that author A introduced a moral argument in paragraph 3: they think honesty is a moral duty.

Author B didn’t mention morality at all. They only discussed practical considerations and cost benefit analyses.

___________

1. This is backwards. Author B discusses public debate and criticism. We’re looking for something in passage A, and not in passage B.
2. CORRECT. Author A discusses morality in paragraph 3. Passage B doesn’t mention morality at all. Author B does talk about an obligation to be honest, but not all obligations are moral. Judges could, for example, be legally obliged to be honest, with penalties or job loss for being caught lying.
3. We’re looking for a principle in passage A, but this is the opposite of passage A’s position. In the final paragraph, author A argues that being honest is a moral duty that we should do even if it leads to bad outcomes.
4. Only author B discussed cost benefit analyses. We’re looking for something in A, and not in B.
5. What the heck does “prudential” mean? It was used in passage A, paragraph 2. So does that mean the author of passage A believes this answer?
    
   When you see a fancy word, it’s easy to panic. But, the LSAT is not a vocabulary test. Prudential was just thrown in to confuse you. It’s not necessary to understand “prudential” to understand this answer.
    
   “Reasons” is a noun in this answer, and “prudential” is an adjective that modifies the noun. You can always remove an adjective and still have a valid sentence. E.g. “The brown dog barked” can be turned into “The dog barked” and you have basically the same meaning.
    
   So let’s try a version of this answer without prudential: “Reasons for something aren’t better proof than reasons against something”
    
   That’s….obvious. It’s just saying not to bias yourself in favour of something by only paying attention to reasons in favour of it.
    
   That’s so obvious that an LSAT writer would almost never bother to write it. LSAT passages don’t say “the sky is blue” or “healthy food makes you healthier” or things that everyone knows.
    
   And indeed, author A says nothing like this answer. Merely using a word used by the author of passage A doesn’t make this answer correct.
    
   By the way, prudential means “involving care and forethought”. Frankly, I’m not sure knowing this helps our understanding either of passage A or of this answer.