LSAT 101 – Section 2 – Question 23

LSAT 101 - Section 2 - Question 23

December 1997

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:38

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT101 S2 Q23
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
A
68%
170
B
7%
163
C
7%
161
D
5%
160
E
14%
166
153
162
170
 +Hardest 150.088 +SubsectionMedium

Essayist: The existence of a moral order in the universe—i.e., an order in which bad is always eventually punished and good rewarded—depends upon human souls being immortal. In some cultures this moral order is regarded as the result of a karma that controls how one is reincarnated, in others it results from the actions of a supreme being who metes out justice to people after their death. But however a moral order is represented, if human souls are immortal, then it follows that the bad will be punished.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that if human souls are immortal, then the bad will be punished. This is based on the fact that the existence of “moral order,” which is a state in which bad is always punished, depends on human soulds being immortal.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author confuses sufficient and necessary conditions. The premise establishes that human souls being immortal is necessary in order for “moral order” (bad always punished) to exist. But this doesn’t imply that if human souls are immortal, that this would be sufficient for “moral order” to exist.

A
From the assertion that something is necessary to a moral order, the argument concludes that that thing is sufficient for an element of the moral order to be realized.
The premise establishes that human souls’ immortality is necessary for moral order. But the author mistakenly thinks this is sufficient for an element of that mordal order to be true (the element of the bad always being punished).
B
The argument takes mere beliefs to be established facts.
The author does not assume or conclude that anything is an established fact. Although he describes what some cultures believe about moral order in the second sentence, he doesn’t suggest that these beliefs are true.
C
From the claim that the immortality of human souls implies that there is a moral order in the universe, the argument concludes that there being a moral order in the universe implies that human souls are immortal.
The author does not rely on a claim that immortality implies the existence of a moral order. Rather, the premise asserts that immortality is necessary for a moral order. Also, the conclusion does not assert that a moral order implies immortality.
D
The argument treats two fundamentally different conceptions of a moral order as essentially the same.
Although the author describes two conceptions of a moral order in the second sentence, the author does not treat these as the same. These play no role in supporting the conclusion. The conclusion is based on the first sentence, which describes what is necessary for a moral order.
E
The argument’s conclusion is presupposed in the definition it gives of a moral order.
The author does not use circular reasoning. The conclusion asserts that immortality is sufficient for an aspect of moral order. This idea is not assumed in the premise, which asserts instead that immortality is necessary for moral order.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 101 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply