PrepTest 115, Section 2, Question 11
A gift is not generous unless it is(37 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- ACharles, who hates(35 more words not shown)
- BEmily gives her(36 more words not shown)
- CAmanda gives each(24 more words not shown)
- DOlga gives her(25 more words not shown)
- EMichael gave his(32 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
An expensive gift isn't automatically generous. We have to apply the rules we're given, even if our everyday use of “generous” is different.
For a gift to count as generous here, two things are required: it must be intended to benefit the recipient, and it must be worth more than the situation calls for. If the customary birthday gift is worth fifty dollars, a gift worth exactly fifty doesn't clear that second requirement. It has to exceed the expected value. And clearing both requirements doesn't, by itself, guarantee generosity; the passage gives requirements, not a promise that nothing else matters.
The selfishness rule works differently. Either of two facts is enough: the gift is given to benefit the giver, or it's worth less than usual. Imagine giving someone tickets to a movie you want to see, solely so you'll get to go, even though the recipient dislikes that movie. That triggers the giver-benefit rule. A twenty-dollar gift when fifty dollars is customary triggers the below-customary-value rule.
What we’re looking for
Now test each answer's verdict against its facts. Does the stated reason actually establish “selfish,” “generous,” or “not generous” under these rules? Keep an eye on intent versus outcome and on value versus what the giver paid. Those aren't interchangeable.
Working the answers
- A
Paying nothing doesn't make the tickets worthless. Charles received expensive tickets and passed them on to a cousin who loves opera. The selfishness rule concerns a gift's value relative to what is customary, not the amount Charles personally paid for it. A hasn't established selfishness from the reason it gives.
- B
Emily intends the membership to help her brother exercise. His feeling hurt doesn't change that stated intention into an intention to benefit Emily. Nor does the answer show that the gift falls below the customary value. A disappointed or offended recipient isn't one of the conditions that establishes selfishness.
- C
Continued business benefits Amanda. That result doesn't establish the two requirements for generosity: an intention to benefit the recipients and a value above what is expected. “Expensive” alone doesn't establish the second requirement; an expensive gift could be customary in that setting. If Amanda gave the wine to secure more business for herself, that would fit the giver-benefit condition for selfishness.
- DCorrect
The computer is the customary graduation gift in Olga's family. It therefore doesn't exceed what is expected, so it fails a requirement for generosity. We can conclude that it isn't generous under the stated rule without deciding that computers are bad gifts or that Olga meant to benefit herself.
- E
The rule asks whether the gift was intended to benefit the recipient, not whether the recipient successfully kept and used it. Losing the money afterward doesn't establish that Michael lacked that intention. Also, “more than he had ever given before” isn't automatically the same as “more than customary.” Either way, the nephew's loss doesn't justify the verdict for the reason E states.
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.