Logical reasoning PrepTest 114 · Section 4 · Question 22

Incorrect. This answer concludes that the act of civil disobedience was justified, so we need to look to principle #2. To be correct, this answer needs to establish that the act was required by the person's conscience. However, this answer establishes Keisha's motives were a concern for other people. That's related to the sufficient condition of the other principle, so this answer is incorrect.

Incorrect. This answer concludes that the act of civil disobedience was not justified, so we need to look to principle #1. To be correct, this answer needs to establish that it was motivated solely by self-interest. However, this notes that she was motivated solely by a desire to help others, so it doesn't meet the sufficient condition. Rather, this answer invalidly applies the negation of the second principle.

Incorrect. This answer concludes that the act of civil disobedience was justified, so we need to look to principle #2. To be correct, this answer needs to establish that the act was required by the person's conscience. However, there's no discussion of her conscience, just her motive being to help others. As such, this answer invalidly applies the negation of the first principle.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True (Principle)

Stimulus Summary:
(1) Civil disobedience motivated solely by self-interest → not Justified
(2) Civil disobedience required by conscience → Justified

Answer Anticipation:
As with most Must Be True (Principle) questions, this stimulus presents two principles that have opposed conclusions. They both have relatively straightforward structures (relying on "if" to highlight a sufficient condition in both), so hopefully your diagram matches ours!

With that noted, we have a principle with a sufficient condition to conclude that an act of civil disobedience is justified, and one that lets us conclude that it isn't. For each answer, let's start by identifying which of those conclusions is reached so we know which principle applies, and then check to see if the sufficient condition is met.

Answer Explanation:
This answer concludes that the act of civil disobedience was justified, so we need to look to principle #2. To be correct, this answer needs to establish that the act was required by the person's conscience. And this answer does state that Maria's conscience required the act, so this answer is correct.

Key Takeaway:
Note that the wrong answers here try to confuse the two principles by mashing the sufficient condition for one with the necessary condition/judgment of the other. Be sure, when there are two principles, to write them out so you can keep them straight!

Incorrect. This answer concludes that the act of civil disobedience was not justified, so we need to look to principle #1. To be correct, this answer needs to establish that it was motivated solely by self-interest. However, it doesn't discuss her motives. In bringing up her conscience, this answer is trying to invalidly apply the negation of the second principle.