PrepTest 105, Section 1, Question 11
Although the concept of free will is essential(84 more words not shown)
The claim that a choice(22 more words not shown)
- AIt is a(5 more words not shown)
- BIt is used(19 more words not shown)
- CIt is cited(15 more words not shown)
- DIt is used(14 more words not shown)
- EIt is used(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Choosing a meal isn't the same as choosing to hurt someone. Even if a person's freely chosen diet contributes to a later heart attack, that doesn't mean the person chose to have a heart attack while driving or intended the resulting damage. Compare that with deliberately committing a harmful crime, such as a robbery.
That difference helps us understand the author's point. The passage says free choice matters to moral responsibility, but its role varies with the situation. We hold the criminal responsible on the assumption of a freely chosen act. We don't assign the driver the same responsibility, even when earlier free choices could have prevented the medical event. We might also think of how we judge a child's choices differently from an adult's; the general idea is that the context matters.
What we’re looking for
The question asks about the claim that diet can affect whether someone has a heart attack. Why include that? It puts a freely chosen action into the driver's story. Without it, we'd simply have one case involving choice and another that didn't. With it, the author can show different judgments of responsibility even though free choices figure in both cases. That supports the main point about free will's varying role.
Working the answers
- A
A subsidiary conclusion both receives support and helps support a further conclusion. For example: “The sky is blue, so it is beautiful; therefore I should paint it.” Whether or not we accept that reasoning, “it is beautiful” has both roles. Here, the dietary claim isn't established by earlier evidence. It is supplied as part of the example used to support the author's point.
- B
The passage explicitly says we do not hold this driver morally responsible for the damage. The dietary claim makes that example more interesting by introducing a freely made choice; it isn't used to argue that we should reverse the judgment and blame the driver.
- C
This reverses the direction of the argument. The author says free will's role in assigning responsibility is not the same in all situations. The example supports that difference, not a recommendation that our concept should be uniform.
- D
The criminal case supplies one side of the comparison. The passage doesn't develop an argument against someone who says criminals shouldn't be held responsible. The dietary claim helps explain the contrasting driver case, and that contrast supports the broader point.
- ECorrect
The claim supports the conclusion that free will's role in determining responsibility varies by situation. Freely chosen diet can figure in the chain leading to harm, yet we don't judge that case as we judge a freely chosen crime. That makes the dietary fact part of the support for the comparison, rather than a conclusion drawn from it.
More Strategy of Argument questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strategy of Argument questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.