PrepTest 105, Section 3, Question 14
Many of us can conceive of penalties that(441 more words not shown)
As described in the second(17 more words not shown)
- AThe correctness of(12 more words not shown)
- BThe correctness of(13 more words not shown)
- CThe correctness of(13 more words not shown)
- DThe correctness of(13 more words not shown)
- EThe correctness of(7 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
The question points us to paragraph 2. There, the second rationale asks whether a punishment is just or appropriate for the crime, independently of its benefit to society. We need a principle that matches that version of the view, even though the ending later reinterprets where our sense of appropriateness comes from.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
“Inherent fairness” matches judging whether the punishment is appropriate in itself. Not judging by consequences matches the stated independence from social benefit. Both halves fit the rationale as introduced.
- B
This also leaves consequences out, so it's worth comparing with A. But it replaces fairness with whatever society deems correct. The rationale asks whether the punishment is just; it doesn't say social approval makes it just. Independence from social benefit alone wouldn't settle that distinction, but the stated emphasis on appropriateness supports A.
- C
This makes consequences part of the test. Paragraph 2 says the justification is independent of benefit, so a partly-consequences approach doesn't match.
- D
Calling the other consideration “intuitive rightness” doesn't fix the same problem: consequences still play a role. We're matching the view as first described, not blending in the final paragraph's explanation.
- E
Consequences are the entire test here. That's the direction of the first rationale, whereas we're asked about the second.
More Application questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Application questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.