PrepTest 102, Section 2, Question 8
Toddlers are not being malicious when they bite(26 more words not shown)
The situation as described above(10 more words not shown)
- ABiting people is(10 more words not shown)
- BToddlers sometimes engage(10 more words not shown)
- CToddlers mistakenly believe(10 more words not shown)
- DToddlers do not(11 more words not shown)
- EResorting to biting(15 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Wanting the toy doesn't automatically settle whether the bite is malicious.
The author focuses on the child's purpose: the toddler wants a toy and sees another person as standing in the way. I can understand the distinction between biting to hurt someone and biting to get something. But could an action still be malicious even when hurting someone isn't its final goal? The example leaves me questioning how the author is using that description.
What we’re looking for
We're asked which generalization the situation most closely fits. My first thought is a rule about intent: perhaps the author treats an action as nonmalicious when hurting someone isn't its aim. I'll keep that reading in mind, but the answer has to stay within what the example supports. We don't know what the toddler understands about adults' expectations or what happens after the bite.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The toddler is trying to solve a problem: someone appears to be preventing access to a wanted toy. Biting is the child's attempted way around that obstacle. This is narrower than my initial thought about defining malicious intent, and it doesn't require us to settle that definition. It simply captures what the child is trying to accomplish. The attempt could fail and A would still fit.
- B
Getting attention and getting the toy are different purposes. Attention could be part of another child's reason for biting, but the example doesn't say that's what's happening here. We can't substitute that familiar-sounding explanation for the purpose we're actually given.
- C
We aren't told whether the child thinks adults consider biting acceptable. The toddler might know adults disapprove and bite anyway, or might not have considered their reaction. The example tells us about the desired toy, not the child's beliefs about adult approval.
- D
This assumes biting often defeats toddlers' purposes and that they fail to recognize that result. Perhaps an adult responds by taking the toy away, but that outcome isn't given. We don't know whether this bite succeeds or backfires, much less what toddlers generally understand about such consequences.
- E
Trying to get something isn't the same as getting it. The child might think biting will help and then fail completely. A says toddlers sometimes use biting as an attempted solution; E says it is sometimes effective. The example supports the attempt without establishing a successful outcome.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.