PrepTest 106, Section 3, Question 23
Ethicist: It is widely believed that it is(50 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AWhen Juan asked(43 more words not shown)
- BA daughter asked(28 more words not shown)
- CA husband told(42 more words not shown)
- DA young boy(31 more words not shown)
- EA friend invited(47 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
People sometimes lie. That alone doesn't tell us when they should lie.
I can imagine an ordinary temptation: a friend is delighted with a new outfit, and an honest opinion might hurt their feelings. Does protecting those feelings justify dishonesty? We could argue either way. The fact that a lie would be more comfortable doesn't automatically make it morally right.
The ethicist gives us a particular rule: lying is morally correct when telling the truth reasonably threatens considerable physical or psychological harm to other people. “Considerable” matters. The rule calls for a reasonable expectation of serious harm, not merely any unpleasant reaction.
What we’re looking for
We're asked which case most closely follows that principle. Set aside whether we personally endorse it and apply its conditions. We'd want a lie that protects someone other than the liar from a reasonably expected, substantial harm caused by telling the truth.
Working the answers
- A
Judy gets Juan to a film he would enjoy. That provides a benefit he might otherwise miss, but missing a pleasing film isn't the same as suffering considerable harm. We aren't given the harmful consequence of the truth that the principle requires. The rule therefore doesn't supply this justification for Judy's lie.
- B
Avoiding a discussion doesn't establish that the daughter would face considerable harm from hearing her father's real preference. Perhaps the conversation would be tedious or awkward. The answer gives us no more serious consequence, and convenience alone doesn't meet the rule.
- C
The stated concern is the inconvenience of canceling a planned trip. That doesn't establish considerable harm to someone else if the husband tells the truth. Concealing the chest pains may also leave a risk unaddressed, but we don't need to predict a medical outcome to reject C. The reason supplied for lying simply doesn't satisfy the principle.
- DCorrect
Telling a young child that a parent loves a sibling more reasonably threatens substantial psychological harm to that child. The mother's false reassurance avoids that foreseeable injury. It is the closest fit with a lie protecting another person from the kind of harm the ethicist describes.
The answer leaves us to recognize the likely emotional impact rather than spelling it out. We don't have to predict a particular reaction or prove harm is inevitable. The principle asks for a reasonable expectation of considerable harm, which this situation supports.
- E
Jamal lies to spare himself emotional pain and embarrassment. The principle concerns harm to others. Even if his distress is serious, protecting himself doesn't meet the condition we're asked to apply.
The answer doesn't say that telling his friend the truth would seriously harm the friend, his ex-wife, or anyone else. Don't let the explicit reference to emotional pain distract from whose pain it is.
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.