PrepTest 108

[lcid:3528] Prep Test 108 LSAT — Reading Comp — S1 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 17-21  .        Many people complain about corporations, but  . there are also those whose criticism goes further and Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Social Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • A criticism (corporations are immoral) and economists' rebuttal (corporations are just business relationships)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Many people's criticism:
      • Businesses are immoral and the cause of many problems in Western society (first sentence)
    • Comparison, according to many people:
      • Criticisms of business apply not just when to those that are fraudulent but also to prioritizing profit (second sentence)
    • Economists' rebuttal:
      • This criticism unfairly applies ethical principles to business relationships (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Background information on corporate ownership (corporations are not people, but most are run by CEOs who serve the owners)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • "Corporate responsibility" refers to the combined responsibility of the people in the corporation (second sentence)
    • Comparisons, according ot the author:
      • Corporations are not people (first sentence)
      • Some corporations are run by the owners, but many (and most large) are run by CEOs who have an obligation to the owners (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "only by" (first sentence), "are not" (first sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Premises to economists' rebuttal (CEOs only responsible to owners, but even maximizing profits helps public)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • The economists' view (the rebuttal against the criticism of corporations): CEOs are just doing their job
      • It's the CEO's job to produce profits (first and second sentence)
      • Even if the CEO was only obligated to look to the public good, they would still work to maximize profits because that will also eventually help the public (last sentence)
    • Comparison:
      • A CEO's job for a charitable institution is not simply producing profits, unlike non-charitable corporations (first sentence)

Paragraph 4

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's criticism of the rebuttal (not all profit-seeking enterprises serve public, CEOs have moral responsibility)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Corporate profit doesn't always lead to public profit (second sentence)
      • Business obligations do not override moral ones (fourth sentence)
        • A CEO could make a case against an immoral practice to owners (fifth sentence)
      • Example of profit-seeking endeavor that harms public
        • A paper mill that decimates forests & pollutes lakes to increase profits (third sentence)
      • Author's attitude: "But" (first sentence), "does not hold up under careful scrutiny" (first sentence), "although there is no doubt" (second sentence), "there is no guarantee—either theoretically or in practice" (second sentence), "It is absurd to deny" (third sentence), "they are not morally paramount" (fourth sentence), "ultimately do not excuse the individual from the responsibility of acting morally" (last sentence)

Main Point: The economists' defense of corporations is ill-founded because corporate profit doesn't always lead to public profit and business obligations do not override moral ones.

Key Lines?

Paragraph 1, Sentence 1 (P1, S1): Criticism of corporations

P1, S3: The economists' rebuttal

P4, S1: The author's response is introduced

Meta-Structure?

Criticizing a Viewpoint: This passage utilizes a Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure.* In such structures, the author describes a view held by another person or group, and then criticizes that view.

In passages that use a Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure, the main point will be the author's central criticism or a summary of the criticisms. We can often find a conclusion in which the author summarizes their criticisms. But since this author doesn't provide such a conclusion, we'll come up with one ourselves. Thus, the main point will be: "The economists' defense of corporations is ill-founded because corporate profit doesn't always lead to public profit and business obligations do not override moral ones."

*As is true for many Criticizing a Viewpoint passages, other Critical Meta-Structures could apply here. Correcting the Record could also certainly describe this passage's argument. You could even use the Resolving a Debate Meta-Structure.

Comparison: This passage’s most prominent minor Meta-Structure is the comparison. The author draws many distinctions throughout the passage (corporations and people, owner-operated and CEO-operated corporations, charitable organizations and corporations, the CEO’s business/legal obligations and moral obligations). At least one of these is bound to be relevant to a question, so having them conveniently highlighted can help us review relevant text when necessary.

Last Thoughts?

Viewpoints in RC are sometimes stacked like onion layers. At the center of this particular passage, we have a view that claims corporations are to blame for many of the problems in Western society. This view is not articulated or expanded upon – it's simply the starting point. Then, the next layer of viewpoint belongs to the economists who think that corporations are absolved from this kind of moral evaluation. This view and the argument behind it are explained. Finally, the center layer of this onion is the author's view that these corporations do, in fact, have moral responsibilities. This view is outlined in the most detail and it represents the main point of the passage. Keeping these views organized and understanding the relationship between them is vital to a complete understanding of this passage.

Question prompt

With which one of Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Social Science

Strategy Overview

Review your notes to recall the economists’ views, then find an answer that must be true according to the passage

Answer Anticipation

This question stem asks us to infer a belief the economists would agree with. If we need to review their viewpoint, we can review the our notes for the first ("A criticism (corporations are immoral) and economists' rebuttal (corporations are just business relationships)") and the third paragraphs ("Premises to economists' rebuttal (CEOs only responsible to owners, but even maximizing profits helps public)"). So, these economists believe that corporations shouldn’t be called immoral because they are run by people who are simply fulfilling their responsibility to raise profits. If we need more information than this, we’ll use our notes to locate the relevant part of the passage.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Even CEOs of charitable Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Based on the review of our notes, would the economists agree with this?

    It's hard to say. We didn't anticipate anything about charitable organizations, but this answer choice is generally consistent with the economists' view that CEOs should maximize profits. At this point, we could check the passage to see if this is supported or defer on selecting (A) and reviewing the passage, opting instead to check the remaining answer choices for something more consistent with what we anticipated.

    If we choose to review the passage, we won't find support for (A). In fact, we'll see that economists argue that CEOs of charitable organizations are explicitly exempt from the responsibility to maximize profits for their owners (P3, S1). So, the economists would disagree with (A), making it incorrect.

  2. B
    CEOs of owner–operated noncharitable Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem

    (B) Based on the review of our notes, would the economists agree with this?

    Well, we didn't anticipate anything specific about CEOs of "owner-operated noncharitable corporations." But this answer choice is definitely consistent with the economists' view that CEOs should maximize profits. At this point, we could check the passage to see if this is supported or table (B), opting instead to check the remaining answer choices for something more consistent with what we anticipated.

    If we review the passage, we'll find the support necessary to select (B). In the third paragraph, the economists argue that

    even at “a noncharitable organization” that is “owner-operated,” where the CEO isn't "obligated to maximize profits," a CEO “should still work to maximize profits” since that will ultimately serve the public interest (P3, S2-S3). (B) is definitely our answer.

  3. C
    Owner–operated noncharitable corporations are Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Based on the review of our notes, would the economists agree with this?

    Nope. We didn't review which types of corporations are the most likely to be profitable. We just reviewed beliefs about CEO's obligation to pursue profits. We can eliminate — or at least table — this answer choice without reviewing the passage.

    Besides, we wouldn't find any support for this answer choice if we re-read the entire passage. The passage simply never discusses which types of corporations are more profitable. (C) is out.

  4. D
    It is highly unlikely Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Based on the review of our notes, would the economists agree with this? 

    Definitely not. Our review of the third paragraph's note reminded us that these economists think that "even maximizing profits helps public." So, the economists would argue that most CEOs benefit the public because whenever a CEO maximizes profits. We can eliminate (D) without checking the passage.

  5. E
    CEOs should attempt to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Based on the review of our notes, would the economists agree with this? 

    No. Our review of the passage gave us the impression the economists were adamantly pro-maximizing profits. It didn't seem like they'd carve out an exception for environmental considerations. Plus, re-reading our note for the third paragraph reminded us that these economists think that "even maximizing profits helps public." This would suggest that the economists do not think maximizing the profit would harm the environment. We can safely eliminate (E) without checking the passage.

    However, if we had to review the passage to eliminate (E), we wouldn't find any support for this statement. We were never given the economists' thoughts on environmental harm, so we can’t say if they would agree with this. (E) is out.

What this tests

Discussion

  • Why not "A" 1 reply

    Started by DDL

View all discussions Start a discussion