PrepTest 143
[lcid:3669] Prep Test 143 LSAT — Reading Comp — S2
Reading comp
Passage
Questions 15-20 . Passage A . Saint Augustine wrote that to proceed against lies . by lying would be like
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Social Science
Passage A
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Passage A - While a wrongdoer doesn't have a moral right to object to being similarly treated, the person returning their actions should consider the harm done to the wrongdoer and others.
Passage B - Kant's moral rule "Do unto others . . . " should be viewed as a right to punish wrongdoing, not a duty to do so.
Key Lines:
Passage A:
Lines 3-4 - A view is described
Lines 5-6 - An opposing view is described
Lines 14-18 - Two questions are posed that highlight a distinction
Lies 19-21 - An example is introduced to more clearly highlight the distinction
Passage B:
Lines 32-34 - The main viewpoint of the passage is introduced
Lines 38-39 - A potential implication of this view is raised
Lines 49-50 - The Author rejects the implication and substitutes her own
Meta-Structure - Relationship Between Passages:
Opposing viewpoint - Passage A brings up two viewpoints that are diametrically opposed to each other. One side says you should turn the other cheek, while the other says an eye for an eye.
Question/Answer - Passage A raises two questions to determine which of the two viewpoints are correct.
Distinction - Both passages raise distinctions. Passage A distinguishes between the rights of the wrongdoer (can they expect others to do right?) and the justification for those wronged (is it justified for them to do wrong back?). Passage B distinguishes between a duty and a right (Line 50) to punish those who have done wrong.
Extended Example - Passage A uses an extended example (Paragraph 4) to ground a rather technical distinction that it makes in Paragraph 3.
Both passages do deal with similar questions, though, of doing right and wrong and whether responding to a wrong act with another wrong act is right/justified. Passage A says that the original wrongdoer can't expect others to do right by them, but those who were wronged aren't necessarily justified in returning the favor because the harm it does must be considered. Passage B, on the other hand, does believe that there's a right to punish those who do wrong—to return the favor—but there's not a duty to do so. Different answers to the same question there!
Last Thoughts:
These were pretty technical and philosophical, so we should be sure that we read each answer carefully so as to not miss any subtle nuances or language mismatches that throw an answer off.
Also, note how we used some common idioms to sum up ideas that were presented in a very technical manner. A lot of the time, the LSAT will do this—take a concept with which you're familiar and complicate it with obtuse language! If you can see through it and pick up on the base concept, sum it up using that—it'll be a lot easier to deal with.
Passage A
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- One view is presented
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Ex. Augustine
- Two wrongs don't make a right
- Paragraph note
- An opposing view is presented
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Repaying a wrong with a wrong has justification
- Ex. Eye for an eye; fair; equilibrium
- Paragraph note
- 2 questions are raised
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Does a liar have a right to be told the truth?
- Is it more justified to lie to a liar?
- Paragraph note
- The questions are distinguished with a hypothetical (and somewhat answered)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Ex - Harmless pathological liar
- Question 1 - No, he can't complain if lied to
- Question 2 - Lying to him isn't justified, as harm to him and others has to be considered
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- A philosopher's view is examined
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Kant - Do unto others . . .
- When you do unto others as they've done unto you, you imply they're rational
- Paragraph note
- A potential implication is considered and argued against with a distinction
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
- Potential implication - We have a duty to punish wrongdoers
- Distinction - Authorize versus compel; right versus duty—we're allowed to punish offenders, but we don't have to
Passage A - While a wrongdoer doesn't have a moral right to object to being similarly treated, the person returning their actions should consider the harm done to the wrongdoer and others.
Passage B - Kant's moral rule "Do unto others . . . " should be viewed as a right to punish wrongdoing, not a duty to do so.
Key Lines:
Passage A:
Lines 3-4 - A view is described
Lines 5-6 - An opposing view is described
Lines 14-18 - Two questions are posed that highlight a distinction
Lies 19-21 - An example is introduced to more clearly highlight the distinction
Passage B:
Lines 32-34 - The main viewpoint of the passage is introduced
Lines 38-39 - A potential implication of this view is raised
Lines 49-50 - The Author rejects the implication and substitutes her own
Meta-Structure - Relationship Between Passages:
Opposing viewpoint - Passage A brings up two viewpoints that are diametrically opposed to each other. One side says you should turn the other cheek, while the other says an eye for an eye.
Question/Answer - Passage A raises two questions to determine which of the two viewpoints are correct.
Distinction - Both passages raise distinctions. Passage A distinguishes between the rights of the wrongdoer (can they expect others to do right?) and the justification for those wronged (is it justified for them to do wrong back?). Passage B distinguishes between a duty and a right (Line 50) to punish those who have done wrong.
Extended Example - Passage A uses an extended example (Paragraph 4) to ground a rather technical distinction that it makes in Paragraph 3.
Both passages do deal with similar questions, though, of doing right and wrong and whether responding to a wrong act with another wrong act is right/justified. Passage A says that the original wrongdoer can't expect others to do right by them, but those who were wronged aren't necessarily justified in returning the favor because the harm it does must be considered. Passage B, on the other hand, does believe that there's a right to punish those who do wrong—to return the favor—but there's not a duty to do so. Different answers to the same question there!
Last Thoughts:
These were pretty technical and philosophical, so we should be sure that we read each answer carefully so as to not miss any subtle nuances or language mismatches that throw an answer off.
Also, note how we used some common idioms to sum up ideas that were presented in a very technical manner. A lot of the time, the LSAT will do this—take a concept with which you're familiar and complicate it with obtuse language! If you can see through it and pick up on the base concept, sum it up using that—it'll be a lot easier to deal with.
Question prompt
Which one of the
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: A
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Humanities
Answer choices
-
Athe harm that may Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Must Be True
Strategy Overview:
Quickly think about the differences between the passages, then hop into the answers and look for one that reflects what we know about Passage A but not Passage B
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
We should always be spending a bit of time after reading the passages to think about the similarities and differences between them. Here, we did that, and we said:
Both passages do deal with similar questions, though, of doing right and wrong and whether responding to a wrong act with another wrong act is right/justified. Passage A says that the original wrongdoer can't expect others to do right by them, but those who were wronged aren't necessarily justified in returning the favor because the harm it does must be considered. Passage B, on the other hand, does believe that there's a right to punish those who do wrong—to return the favor—but there's not a duty to do so. Different answers to the same question there!
The answer to this question will likely be a detail, not a theme, but the details should line up with those bigger picture concerns.
Answer Explanation:
(Lines 24-27) Passage A argues that the harm caused by a bad action must be considered when deciding whether to respond to a wrong with another wrong. Passage B, however, doesn't discuss harm, as it takes a more "do unto others" approach. This answer is therefore correct.
Key Takeaway:
Here's the funny thing about RC—the questions end up overlapping quite a bit. After all, they're all about the same passage(s), and those passages only have so many interesting details in them. As such, if you're doing your job evaluating answers in one question, that'll likely lead you to review and reinforce the ideas that are going to show up in later questions. In Question #15, we eliminated (A) because harm was discussed in Passage A but not Passage B. In this question, we ended up picking answer (A) because it mentioned harm. Unlike LR, you don't want to "reset" after each question—you want to carry the information you learn from each one into future questions. -
Bthe consequences of not Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 24-27) Neither passage discusses the consequences of taking an eye for an eye. The closest we get is Passage A stating that harm caused by such an action should be taken into account, but that is a discussion of the consequences of reciprocating a wrong, not, as this question asks, not reciprocating it. -
Cthe properties an action Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 34-37) Without getting into whether the discussion in Passage B addresses these properties (it's more about rational beings than rational actions), rationality features in that passage and not in A, so we can eliminate this answer. -
Dthe extent to which Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. (Line 40; Line 43) Passage B is the one to talk about respect. -
Einstances in which people Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 21-22; Lines 46-48) Passage A says that someone who lies has no right to complain about being lied to. Passage B states that rational beings authorize others to treat them as they treat others. So both passages address this in some way.
What this tests
Discussion
-
Started by Ryan-Mahabir